tv Politics Public Policy Today CSPAN October 29, 2012 8:00pm-1:00am EDT
round of applause. [applause] >> now through election day, whatever coverage of the presidential candidates. plus, the bay from key house, senate, and government races are run the country. on c-span tonight, mitt romney campaigns in ohio. followed by vice president joe biden and bill clinton at a rally in ohio. a look atand a look at iowa wite latest chairs. the only place to get the real deal. i like newsmakers and -- i like that the commentary is only intended to let you know what is going on. there is not opinion and i appreciate how i can see through
and understand the progrming itself. and i get my analysi elsewhere. c-sps jus tout th only wato g >> justin wat c-span on comcast. c-span, brought to you as a public service by levision pvide >> as on the east coast, the candidates alter their schedules. the federal goverment is closed. president obama nad mitt romney suspended campiagn activities through tuesday. and barack obama monitors the situation with the federal
i say, avon lake is fired up today. thank you all for being here. and i want to thank mary taylor to make sure ohio meets its potential. but they can't do it on their own. they need someone they can work with, and that's mitt romney. folks, 8 more days. now, three days ago i was at the avon lake victory center. and the place was packed. people were enthused. they could see help is on the way with mitt romney and paul
ryan. [applause] >> let me ask you, will you do everything you can do to ensure we can bring back america's promise. are you going to do it? put up your hand if you're going to make phone calls, commit to mitt today. let me see your hands. commit to mitt. this year, in ohio, you can commit early to mitt. go down to lorraine, 1985 north ridge road and vote early. you can leave after the event here -- and then on election day we cna find five people we know to get to the polls to commit to
mitt. going for it. and we have to help the republican team. he needs a team that is with him. we have to make sure jim is reelected. jim jordan, bob gibbs are here. and i want to be the senior senator from ohio. we need josh mandel in ohio. we need him now. you know, president obama -- over the last four years has made a lot of decisions. some of them, he siad would result in new jobs that haven't happened. he said he'd cut the deficit. it hasn't happened. we have someone who is running
for president who knows how to bring back jobs. he has the experience. he has the experience and the record nd he knows how to work with democrats and repubicansbls and that's why we need mitt romney to fix what's broken and bring back the american dream. i see a uaw member here in front of me. i will talk autos in a way that is straight talk. obama said a few things that, as he said, were "whoppers." he said, you wanted to take those companies through ban
kruptcy. it was obama who took gm and chrysler through bankruptcy. it was mitt romney who did provide for loan guarantees. every fact-checker who looked has said that barack obama was wrong and was not telling the truth. this is what is most important, with the communities depending on autos. the policies that will be good for the auto industry, for the state of ohio. [applause] he wants sensible regulations, for the auto companies and to
make sure we can get the auto companies on their feet and make sure trade is fair. he wants worker retraining to work better. that will keep auto jobs in ohio. and strengthen the industry. that is what mitt romney will do. in the fourth're quarter and the score is tied. zone.i nthe ren the red the momentum is on our side. will we be sure we take mitt romney over the goal line in the next eight days? ladies and gentlemen, the next
president of the united states, mitt romney. >> thank you. [applause] >> what an avon lake welcome. it is an honor to be with you. than, you, sen. portman, and sen. taylor. he was my sparring partner in debate prep. it is nice not to argue with him. it is good to have him on the campaign trail. and congressman jim's work. we have to reelect him as the
next congressman in the district. we have chairman reince priebus. we aere happy to have him. the former cleveland browns great, gary baxter. he is here. and i appreciate his support in the campaign. i have benen heartened by the support we're recieving. the attention on this race is because people understand how much is at stake. it is a critical time for the country. we face challenges, massive debt, and an economy that is not putting our people to work. young people coming out of college can't find work. china, which is going to be a major economic power.
it has been taking a lot of jobs from people in ohio, with radical violent jihadists. this is a big election about big things, and i am proud we are focusing on what we'll do to bring real chance to a country that needs it. we have a president today that -- has a different view about guesus being on the right track. my view is that this is a turning point for america. and those people who want change from day one will vote for paul ryan and myself.
as i go across the country, i recognize that people don't want 23 million americans out of work, looking for a good job. they don't want administrations compftablfortable with trillion dollar deficits and kids not getting jobs out of college, and they don't like the gridlock in washington. over the coming days, i will talk to people across the country about what those changes look like. this is detailed but let me put this in perspective. the ability of america to create jobs for american workers is about the peolpe who hire people -- and if companies that have
been around a long time will build factories and hire more people. if you want good jobs getting out of school -- you have to see entreprenuers starting businesses and big companies growing. you have seen big companies going elsewhere as entreprenuers pull back. we are a tt a 30 year low in new businesses. one reason they do not invest in america is as they look around the world and see how much they have to pay, we pay more to government than any other major country in the world. the corporate tax rate is down to 25% in europe.
ours is 35%. canada brought the tax rate down to 15%. businesses go there to save money. what i will do is bring the corporate tax rate from 35% to 25%. now, you might think -- [applause] >> same time, we'll have to get rid of loopholes and extensions and we need the revenue we need. but we need to bring the rates down and make ohio a more interesting place to invest. small business doesn't pay the corporate tax rate. it is 35%. i want to bring down the individual rate as well.
thoseen -- i'll make proposals to congress on day one. things i do -- we will put america on track for a balanced budget. we can't keep spending more money -- [applause] >> what we talk about, these topics like big government policy -- they effect the lives of individual americans. this is about you and your life. say you are a senior -- i see a senior waving. i meant senior by age, not senior in high school. let's say you are a 65 year old or older. and when you -- when you get a
medical condition requiring specialist. if you call the office and ask for an appointment, if we install obamacare, 50% of america's doctors say, they willsa say no to medicare patients. he has cut $715 million. when health care matters so much, people will find less ability to choose the doctor they want. i will not cut this $716 million. i will restore medicare -, and makre sure seniors -- and if you're a college student -- at some point, you will be
college students. you will pay the interest on that for a long time. but i have news that is not good news. if they graduate under the president, half won't find a good job. i will make sure people coming out of college are able to get good jobs. and one more thing. because the president is spending more than he is taking in, we are passing on debt to your generation. there are $50,000 of debt you have to pay. when you see taxes being
withdrawn, ther eare taxee are f what is given to my generation. it is immoral for us to keep spending what we don't have. i'll get us back. [applause] >> if you're -- if you're a 40- year old or 50-year old, in the primary years of your life -- you may not put away what you thought you could put away. the expectation was money from retirement. a lot of people who are employed find it hard to make ends meet. i was speaking to a guy from waukesha wisconsin. there is a wisconsonite. he got $23 plus benefit, now he
can only find $8 without benefits. people in this country are having hard times unde the presidents economic policy. we've had four debates. there is no agenda. the president can't lay anything out except going down the same road. i call it, "forewarned." we know where this road heads. i actually have a plan. i have a plan to create 12 million new jobs. it has five parts. number one. we take advantage of oil, coal, and natural gas. >> two, we will open more trade,
with latin america. latin america is an enormous economy. if nations cheat in trade, we will stop them. we have to label those who are cheating for what they are. and make sure our training programs work for today. and number four, number five we champion small business. [applause] and all this -- all this is going to happen because we'll do something spoken about in campaign after campaign but not done. i will work with democrats.
we have to find a way to work with people. democrats and republicans love america. we can come together. i was governor of a state with a legislature that was 88 % democrat. we were able to cut state spending. not just lower the rate of growth. cut it. we worked together, republicans and democrats. ublicanseet with replu and democrats. it is time to put the interests of the american people above the interests of politics. [applause]
i am confident. i am confident in the future. i am convinced the best days are ahead. i have seen the heart of the american people. i wa a boy scout leader some years ago. [applause] >> boy scout troup right here. i was at the court of honor where eagle scout awards are given. i was at the end of the table. next to the american flag. the man speaking was from monument. they had one with tassles and
flew it above the capital. they asked nassa to take it on the space shuttle. they were so proud as they watched the challenger launch. and then they saw it explode before theri eyes. he called to ask if they'd found part of the flag. they hadn't. he called week after week. then he gave up until he read an article about the challenging disaster. and they mentioned something about a flag. he called nasa. have you called our flag. in fact, they said, we have a presentation for your boys. they presented them with the
container. inside the container was the flag in perfect condition. that's it on the flag pole next to mr. romney. i pulled out the flag. it was as if electricity was running through my arms. i think of the people who lived their lives for more than themselves. think of our men and women, their willingness to walk in danger's way for us. for liberty and freedom. it is part of the american character to give of oneself
for something greater. the patriots -- who serve in the military -- and wh oserve in the homes. my sister, lynn, is in her 70's with 8 children. they're all married with kids of their own. the youngest, jeffrey, has downs syndrome. he is 43 now. her husband died years ago and she is with jeffrey. she has spent 43 years to making sure his life is as full and complete as hit can possibly be. a hero, to me. i think of the single moms across the country who are sving aving so they can have a good meal on the table at the end of the day.
i think of the men and women working two jobs. they wrok two jobs so theyir ir kids can have the clothes others have. and the couples who won't have christmas this year -- but will save to give theri kids a better christmas. we are known for our willingness to give to others. this is that time in america. we face real challenges. the people of ohio are given to have real eyes. i am counting on you to make the right choice.
there was a fictional football team -- called friday night lights. the athletes would go off and touch a sign that said, "clear eyes, full hearts, can't lose." i am convinced on november 6, the people of ohio, with clear eyes and full hearts, will make sure america can't lose. we are taking back this country. [applause] >> one more thing i want to mention to you. you can see what is happening across the country. on the east coast, a lot of
people are enduring difficult times. our hearts and prayers go to them as we think about how tough it will be. i don't think here's been a hurricane in ohio a long time, but there are families that may be hurt in their possessions or something more severe. i'd like to ask you to make a contribution -- to be a help as much as you possibly can to help those in harms way. we've faced these challenged before.
this looks like a time to come together and give our support to those who need it. our victory centers are making collections of items -- and if you do this from your email, and interenrnet -- we are counting n ohio. the people of the atlantic coast count on ohio but the people of the entire nation are counting on ohio. my guess is if ohio votes me in as president, i'll be the next president of the united states. [applause] thank you. [no au[applause] ♪
i want to thank the mayor for invitimg me, congressman tim ryan for his service. former congressman john -- is kere and i want to than him. this was a day the president and i had planned -- on not working. can you turn it up. is that better? [applause] >> this is a day the president and i had planned to travel from florida to ohio to virginia, but the weather had other things in mind. so a few days ago we canceled the virginia stop because we
didn't want to imperil any lives. we went to florida. he got up and said, "i have to go back. i have to handle the storm. i said, mr. president, that is the right call. spoke in orlando and got on the plane and threflew throuh the edges of the storm to be here with vice president biden. i will bring him on in a moment. i wnat to thank him for what he has done. let me say a few words about this election and ohio. i like youngstown a lot. i like it -- i like it because it is a place that still believes in manufacturing.
it is one of the mid-size cities i mentioned in my book, "back to work" that has done a remarkable job of selling american-made producests around the world. i like it because your largest employer is youngstown state and the future bleonelongs to communities who can create jobs from theriir universities. i want to say a few words about what this election means to me. you know -- i can't run for anything anymore. and -- you are only stuck with me because hillary has one of the two jobs in the government that doesn't permit you to be involved.
but when you reach a certain point, you realize elections come and go, but the only thing that really matters is if people are better off when you quit than when you started ,and if things are coming together instead of being torn apart. ikno know when there is anxiety -- that tearing-apart deal works in politics. isaw th saw reports of gov. romney's latest add that said the president allowed jeep to move to china. so, this morning, before he left florida, he said -- you know, of all the things gov. romney has
said, that probably hurts my feelings the most. i never had money when i was a kid, and the first new car i owned, i was 30, and it was a jeep. i would never move jeep to china. it turns out jeep is re-opening in china because they made so much money here the ycan afford to do it and are going on with their plans here. they put out a statement saying it was a load of bull. they are roaring in america, thanks to people like the people of ohio. and so -- - [applause] >> in keeping with that, here's what i want to say this election is about.
i support barack obama, because i think he has a better plan and a jobs record, better budget plan, better education plan, than his opponent, gov. romney. if you listen to all those debates -- the republican argument comes down to, we left him a terrible mess, and in four years he didn't fix it. we discovered middle class people are having a hard time. so take him out and put ius back in and we'll do what we did before on steriods. that is the argument. let's loo ak at this.
i hope i've earned some credibility with you. on jobs and budgets. first thing we have to decide is, do you believe the country works better when we're all in this together or when you're on your own. do you believe the economy works better with shared responsibility or we give all the money to the top and hope it trickles down? or that our policies are better based on evidence or extremeist idiology. onwhe nwe base them oour budges illusion?tic or
first of all, let's start with the facts. obama ran for president for two years, including the secretary of state and joe biden. they all thought what they were doing was offering specific solutions. to change the courst of a weak economy. before the meltdown under the trickle down policy -- before the meltdown. then, boom, six weeks before the election, the biggest crash since the great depression. laced through all this shapeshifting in the debates,
are what the president calls "romnesia." the argument is that if president obama had been gov. romney, it would all be hunky dory. that is not true. not a single person who served as president, including me, could repair all the damage in four years. and look. opinion.ot jus tmt my the most important authority on financial crashes are two professors at harvard. mr. rogoff is a moderate republican, but one of the evidence based guys.
not popular in the republican party today. i called him and said, you send me a book, "this time, it's different." i read it. is thre anere any way anyone cod repair all the damage obama found when he took office, losing 800,00 jobs a month. he said -- no, no way. look, most countries that have this damage, it takes 10 years to get over. and you never get over. you build a new economy. beat that?'t we he said, we can beat that. because of the energy, the productivity of the workers.
maybe we could beat that, in 7-8 years. nobody could do it in four years. what has happened in four years? the president stopped the slide in depression. and, wait. you have been paid back for every nickle put into the financial industry plus interest. you got your money back plus interest. the banks are in the best shape in 20 years, thanks to those new rules on wall street preventing future bailouts. those are teh rules gov. rom ney wants to weaken. privated 5.3 million sector jobs, twice as many as in
the previous seven years before the melt-down. manufacturing jobs are growing for the first time since the 1990's. and as every ohioan knows, the president's auto restructuring saved a million jobs. and there are 250,000 more people -- [applause] i tell you, i've heard gov. romney's explaination. he ties himself in more knots than a boy scout in a knot-tying contest. but he was against it, and the president did it. and ohio is an old-school state. i mean that in the best sense. he had your back when your back was agains tthe wall and you
have to have his back, now. [applause] >> so, the record -- and look at where we're going. his jobs plan is based on investments in education and training so everyone can do the jobs of the future, for people in and out of school. cleveland is pionerriering the training to non-college educated people so they can get decent jobs and start growing again. to invest in science and technology and research. that's a better economic plan
than one more round of tax cuts spending by a 22% cut on on education, science, and technology. it is bad for youngstown state, and obama's plan is better for the future of america. obama's education plan is better for the future of america. he is committed to hiring 100,00 0 new science, technology, and math teachers. committed to cutting the rate of inflation of college costs in half and to the student loan reform program, the single most important thing nobdody knows
about. this alone justifies his reelection if you believe in the future. the old student loan system worked like -- the federal government paid the banks to make loands and guaranteed 93% of the loans. the new system -- under that old system, it meant we dropeped to 16th in the world in college degrees. a perscription for disaster. almost every job is created by someone with a degree. we can't afford to be 16th in the world. so what did the president and congress do? what did congressman ryan do?
they passed a law to change the system. we say, here are the people who qualify and the yget the loans at a lower interest rate. every student in the country who gets one of these loans will have the right to pay it back as a low, fixed percent of their income for 20 years. now, think about this. what that means is, nobody ever has to drop out of college because theyr'e scared of b orrowing more money. if you get out and want to teach in a small town in rural ohio -- you can do it anyway. what you have to pay will be determined by what you're
making. not the other way around. and believe it or not, here's the kicker. this, over 10 years, costs you $60 billion less than the old system. so -- the president and the congress allocated that to increasing pell grands every year for a decade and to maintaining the tuition tax credit to pay the way through college. this is unbelievable. now, here's what you need to know. even the more moderate immage of governor romney cannot obscure the fact he has committed to repealing that law.
he wants to give -- i'm telling you. idiology over evidence. the government did it, must be something wrong. they want to repeal the law and give the money back to bankers. make the loans harder to repay, not guarantee the pell grants or the tax credits. on that grounds alone, you should re-elect president barack obama the president of the united states. [applause] >> i like it. he has a better health care position than gov. romney. they talk about how terrible obamacare is. oh, it's awful. how it robs medicare. a terrible burden. the worst thing we could do is
stay with the status quo. last week, a big headline said, a big reason working peolpe in this country could not get a pay raise, so many of the employers have to pay health insurance premiums, and we spend literally 6% of our national income on health care. year.s on$1 trillion a sit was killing us. what has happened since obm amacare passed? two years in a row, when health inflation was half what it was -- the first time in 51 years that has worked. second, we have $1.3 billion
dolllars, in refunds. including $11 million in refunds through 143,000 peole in ohio. why? because of the real reason they want to repeal tis. the law says 85% of your insurance premium needs to go to health care, not profits. 3 miliolion young people have health insurance under their parent's policy under this law. starting next year, over 30 million americans will be able
to afford health care for the first time, with pre-existing conditions. and the president did do what congressman ryan did. $716 billion less -- because medical professionals, gov. romney says the aarp is america's worst enemy of seniors. the aarp is trying to plunder the future of seniors health care. why do they do that? they don't need the money. the medicare trust fund is last ing longer. he lengthened the life of medicare by eight years, closed
the donut hole and saved the average senior $600 and we help them buy insurance at pre- existing conditions. romney's position is "repeal it. to heck with people with preexisting conditions. bring it down to 2016." and he says, "oh, i have to do this. these insurance companies won't cover anyone in medicare advantage." really? if if that is true we ought to know because that law is in effect for right now. what happened last year? he had a number of companies providing medicare advantage to 17% of people who are paying 16% less.
president obama strengthened health-care. i want to say something about energy. ohio is not just about gas and coal. you also people working in the solar and wind industry. mitt romney's policy is all of the above except nothing for wind and nothing for solar. we have 100,000 americans working in the solar industry today. the prices are dropping. we rank first or second in the world in the ability to generate electricity from the
sun. all of the above is the right position. the last thing i want to say is i am for president obama because his budget adds up. in the last 50 years there have been five surpluses. when republicans talk, let's not forget we never had a structural debt in this country in times of economic growth before 1981. we'd run little deficits and we were already investing more with a long-term payoff. we tripled the debt in the first eight years of 1980's and then increased it 150% again. then i brought it down for you. they doubled it again when i left office. let's not forget this. how did they do it that promising yet we just cut taxes on upper income people there be so much for all be well. now we're doing this again. the president is giving a budget. he's already agreed to $1
trillion with the spending cuts already in action. it reduce the debt by $4 trillion our next 10-years. the higher income groups who got lost to the tax cuts and virtually all of the economic gains of the last decade pays our fair share by paying more when i was president. that is all they do. what does that do? the first thing they do is to say we need to spend $2 trillion more than we are going to spend on defense and more than the pentagon says we need.
$25 trillion tax cuts would make president george w. bush look like a banker. he must have been asleep at the switch. you said like jerry mcguire "show me the money." you are the business guy. see me back after the election. who can take you seriously? here is my budget although it is not. see me about it after the election. the reason is there are only three options. if you want to repeal tax exemptions you have to cut the tax exemptions on the middle- class and governor romney says he will raise those taxes. or you can do what they have always done in just let the deficit explode again. when the economy goes it'll be a problem.
or you could just gut the federal budget. gut funding for education. gut the student loan program. i spent $3 billion of your money to separate the human genome. he know how much economic activity it has generated? $790 billion. barack obama wants to raise it. they want to cut its. one thing they have not disavowed is they intend to cut
medicaid by 33% over 10 years and get back to the state of ohio. medicaid provides medical coverage to lower income kids, most of them have working families. some of them are african american. some are latino. some are asian or middle eastern background. most of them are white folks. this is not a racial deal. this is an equal opportunity hosing. it is not right.
most medicaid money goes to to other groups. first, elderly people on medicare who spent all their money and cannot afford to be in a nursing home except medicaid pays for it. should we send it to ohio and just blame the state and say your mother can stay and yours cannot? maybe worst of all, medicare provides health care to help for disabled children in homes that [inaudible] even upper-middle-class homes because this party takes care of a child with autism or a
developmental disability. you want to cut this? it is wrong. it is wrong. there is still will not be enough money to balance the budget. barack obama has a better education and health care plan. it better energy plan. we are all in this together. you are not on your own. it is consistent with good economics. shared responsibility in prosperity, not trickled down. it is consistent with the policy making. it consisted, do it on arithmetic. i have been honored to work in this campaign.
i get support from republicans and democrats and independents. at the time i do not know who is what. we are working for a practical goal. that is how america ought to work again. it will only do that if you re- elect president obama. i want you to remember this. i know we are preaching to the savior. i want you to be here in go vote and dry out people for early voting. i want you to be here and talk to people who may still be and decided. you know what the truth is. you know what the facts are. i want you to find every last student to fight for the student
loan program. i am especially grateful to vice president joe biden for a number of things. when i served as president, thanks to him we passed 100,000 police officers on the street in gave us eight years of declining crime. we passed the violence against women act thanks to him. after he became vice president, he became president obama's ambassador to middle-class america to make sure nobody in washington ever forgot what it was like to get up every day and work all day and worry about how you're going to pay those bills and raise those kids and how the american dream could be made real.
a warm welcome to joe biden, the vice president of the united states. [cheers and applause] >> hello, youngstown. i tell you what. this is a switch. president clinton introducing me. i spent eight years introducing him when i was united states center. what a great pleasure it was working for this president. what a pleasure it is that he still works. i know you are expecting the real president.
he asked me to expresses regret for not being able to be here. he's still doing the job a president should be doing. i want to thank all the first responders throughout this country. there are a whole lot of folks all over the country. it is further evidence that when america stands together we are all better off. when america stand together everybody is better off. president clinton and sherrod brown, here is a man with a heart and courage. never worry abouhim changing his mi.
thank you foallowing us to get o. a that i love workin wit and i mean this truly, i served in the congress and senate a long time. i did not find anyone better than congressman tim ryan. where are you? that is a stand-up guy. we need jobs back. it is great to see you. you are here. where are you? now you have seen the debate. the president has three and i have one with congressman ryan. if there was any wonder left or there were historic differences, i do not know where
you have been. governor romney and congressman ryan cannot run from their record or positions. the last foreign policy debate, i was not sure whether governor romney was going to endorse president obama. we roman catholic say that boy had an epiphany. governor romney went from sank it was a mistake we did not leave 30,000 troops in iraq. he sounded like he was against the war from the beginning. i was amazed. he went from labeling russia last year as the single greatest geopolitical threats to the united states and even opposed the new gun control treaty that every republican said to push that, he said he would not have supported it. all of a sudden we can work with russia.
you know that. did you hear that? i thought, turn that tv up. he is now putin's best friend. when as in the second debate what would you commit to, he said it depends. with these guys it depends on everything. it always depends who they're talking to or where they are. it depends on what the vote is. it always depends. i am from pennsylvania. the grandfather always said be aware of the convertists. one issue they cannot bring themselves to say they now agreed with us on was issues relating to women. think about it now. they are ready to jettison foreign-policy to win this election. they still cannot bring themselves, and i am being earnest, they cannot bring themselves to move into the 21st century on women. they views that are stuck in the 50's for real. for the refusal is stunning. it says an awful lot about these guys. when governor romney was asked direct questions about whether or not our daughters, spouses,
women of this country are entitled to equal pay, what did he say? he started talking about binders. his staff made a binder full of women who were qualified. whoa. all yet to do is not anyone in our doors. it was not hard. think about what it says. he never did answer the question. he never did answer the question equal pay for equal work. does not come as a surprise for a guy who says he would not have supported the lily ledbetter act. it is 2012. the differences are stark. i want to make sure you understand that they still think speaking of our health
care proposal, and they still think mr. president. they still being that insurers should be able to charge women but now the charge an average of 50% more for the taxing policy man gets for a woman. we changed the law that comes into effect next year. right now they can literally label pregnancy as a pre- existing condition. it sounds like i'm making this up. i am not. we made it against it. they want to repeal it. just imagine 40 hard years according women have made to gain equality, imagine what would happen a romney appointed supreme court will look like. i want to make something absolutely clear. the basic premise which will look at these issues, we believe our daughters and children are entitled to every single rights my son and grandson have. no exception. it is astounding.
that is how you pay for it. no wonder they're walking away from it. he said we're going to pay for this. when asked to name me one, he said no. the math is too complicated. romney was able to name what little he will not close, the one he was asked about 60 minutes. he was asked, do you believe you are paying only 14% tax rate and all its $20 million and the guy making $50,000 a year has a
higher tax rate? he said "i sure do." this is deadly earnest. these guys mean it. as president obama said the day after the second debate, he said the governor plans are awful sketchy. well president clinton, i don't like correcting president obama but i'm going to do it. his plans are not sketchy. they are etch-a-sketchy. they run away from their own shadows.
tax cuts. they say not unless the 120,000 families have half a trillion dollars. it is outrageous. the other candidates are running away from this. it is the ryan budget. it has already passed the united states congress. when it does pass, "the new york times" refers to it as the most extreme budget plan. as my wife and say, just imagine 40 hard years of fighting women and wait? imagine what happened with mitt romney supreme court. imagine what a romney-appointed supreme court will do.
i want to make something clear the basic promise that barack and i look at these issues. first, the first point of that plan? and this must come as a shock to all the guys and women rarely debated in his primary? $5 trillion tax plan that the president has spoken about, president clinton, which will provide an additional $1.1 trillion in tax cuts for people making over $1 million a year. the cost, $2,000 a year with middle-class children, families. the governor said no. [drop]
ads. that creates 800,000 new jobs according to the experts. all overseas. all overseas. by the way, remember when governor romney at the convention said the first and i will do when elected is to take jobs tour. it is going to have to be a foreign trip. when you hear the governor romney say he protects american jobs by being tough on china, a word for you -- malarkey. absolute malarkey. look, he is saying he would get tough on china is only outdone by his bizarre claims about the automobile industry. a week ago, remember what he was saying with the president. mr. president, i supported the rescue of the automobile industry. i said we will get them to bankruptcy, etc. the problem is he did not. he did not say -- he would not allow a penny of federal money to help them out. there was nobody including bain capital willing to come in and
help them out. i have never seen this in public. i have served with eight presidents. within two weeks he is running an ad in the state saying that president obama made the companies go bankrupt, is now gave the industry the italians who are selling it to the chinese. whoa. bless me, father, for i have sinned. what are you talking about? i have never seen anything like that. it is an absolutely patently false assertion. it is such an outrageous assertion one of the few times in my memory and major american corporation, chrysler, has felt obliged to go public and say that is the truth in this. they said jeep has no intention of selling out to china. chrysler corporation, which is highly unusual, said a careful and unbiased reading would have
saved unnecessary fantasies and extravagant comments. ladies and gentlemen, have they no shame? romney will say anything, absolutely anything to win it, it seems. but he cannot run from the truth. he said in an article entitled that he wrote, "let detroit go bankrupt." only the head of bain capital could think of liquidating an industry is the same thing as saving it. that is what he did at bain capital. look, we did not take governor romney's advice. we did not let detroit go bankrupt. we saved 1 million jobs and created 250,000 good middle- class jobs in the united states of america. i guess romney may have romnesia, but he is counting on america having amnesia. they will not forget so soon. the single best example of this
man's philosophy is not what he did at bain. it is a different job. the president's job is to create jobs for america, bring jobs back to america, not send jobs overseas. they said, look, that was just his business philosophy. let me tell you, when he was governor of the state of massachusetts -- this is a fact -- as governor, his administration signed $160,000 a month contracts out of the taxes of the people of massachusetts to send a call service that poor people called to see if they qualified for unemployment insurance or food stamps. he paid 160,000 bucks a month to send that call service overseas. the massachusetts legislature passed a law saying you could not do that, and he vetoed that law. do not tell me this is just his business philosophy. this is his philosophy. we have seen this movie before. we know how it ends when you have massive cuts for the wealthy and let banks make the judgments again. we know how events -- 9 million
lost jobs, $16 trillion in home equity and retirement plans evaporated for the middle class, and the great recession of 2008. that is how it ended. the american people will not go back. we will not go back. folks, instead of romney and ryan signing their pledge to a guy named grover norquist to cut taxes for the very wealthy, they should be signing a pledge to the middle class people of america that they will level the playing field, that they will do right by the american people, they will give them a fair shot again. that is the pledge we have signed from the beginning. we have a different way forward. we will focuthe second term on the continuation of what we have done to create secure middle-class jobs because we believe the only way america's wealthy does well is when the middle-class succeeds. that is the only ladder up the working-class people have, and the wealthy do very well when the middle class is doing well.
and as president clinton has pointed out, we think the foundation upon which you build a middle class is to continue to support and grow education in america. we will continue to provide access to higher education. we will continue to help these folks struggle to stay and get into college, and will create -- we will generate 100,000 new math and science teachers in america to make sure we remain number one in the world. we are going to double exports
creating 1 million new manufacturing jobs. we will change the tax code so we reward companies that come home, not those that go overseas. we are going to train 2 million more americans over the next three years. we are right to cut oil imports by half by 2020 as the president said with clean coal, oil, natural gas, as well as for nuclear. over the objections of governor romney, we will still focus on conservation. we will double the mileage of american light trucks, automobiles, which will save you $1.7 trillion and 12 billion barrels of oil.
we have seen this movie before. we know how it ends when you have massive cuts for the wealthy and let banks make the judgments again. we know how events -- 9 million lost jobs, $16 trillion in home equity and retirement plans evaporated for the middle class, and the great recession of 2008. that is how it ended. the american people will not go back. we will not go back. folks, instead of romney and ryan signing their pledge to a guy named grover norquist to cut taxes for the very wealthy, they should be signing a pledge to the middle class people of america that they will level the playing field, that they will do right by the american people, they will give them a fair shot again.
that is the pledge we have signed from the beginning. we have a different way forward. we will focus the second term on the continuation of what we have done to create secure middle-class jobs because we believe the only way america's wealthy does well is when the middle-class succeeds. that is the only ladder up the working-class people have, and the wealthy do very well when the middle class is doing well. and as president clinton has pointed out, we think the foundation upon which you build a middle class is to continue to support and grow education in
america. we will continue to provide access to higher education. we will continue to help these folks struggle to stay and get into college, and will create -- we will generate 100,000 new math and science teachers in america to make sure we remain number one in the world. we are going to double exports creating 1 million new manufacturing jobs. we will change the tax code so
we reward companies that come home, not those that go overseas. we are going to train 2 million more americans over the next three years. we are right to cut oil imports by half by 2020 as the president said with clean coal, oil, natural gas, as well as for nuclear. over the objections of governor romney, we will stilfocus conservation. we will double the mileage of american light trucks, automobiles, which will save you $1.7 trillion and 12 billion barrels of oil. we have been pushing to allow people to refinance and renegotiate their mortgages. we have a plan that will not cost the taxpayers a penny, allowing 14 million people in america who have never missed a mortgage payment, but are paying at up to 7%, refinance at up to 4%, saving more than $3,000 a year. we're going to keep our commitments as we did in iraq. we are going to end this war in afghanistan. saving hundreds of billions of dollars and investing in america, and american growth, american bridges, american undertakings, creating millions of new good-paying jobs. folks, i ask myself, the president and i have been friends for a long time. and i want to say something that tim can concur with, but the press will cover this. i have spent a lot of time in the senate.
could these guys continue, as president clinton says, the last administration's program on steroids? how could they do that in good conscience? because i think they are both honorable men. how can they do it? here is my conclusion i have reached. you can reach your own. i mean this sincerely. it is because how they feel about the american people. we flatly reject the notion that 47% of the american people are unwilling to take -- here is the part that offended me. [applause] it offended me when he said 47% of the american people are unwilling to take responsibility for their own lives. he was talking about my mom and dad. he was talking about the people
i grew up in with scranton. he was talking about the people i was raised with in delaware. these are hard-working people. these are people who have done everything by the numbers. they have worked hard, they paid their payroll taxes, they are seniors who are now paying taxes. they are those 68,000 warriors who are marching through those god-awful mountains of afghanistan. i have been in and out of iraq and afghanistan over 20 times. these folks, these warriors, they are not paying any tax on their salaries. nor should they pay any tax on their salaries. folks, speaking of those warriors, we owe them and their families. how many of you know someone whose son, daughter, husband or
wife went to afghanistan or iraq? raise your hands. my son was in iraq. and let me tell you something. we owe them, and here is the deal -- mr. president, every single morning get up i have my staff contact the pentagon, because i want to know exactly how many sacrifices have been made. just in the last five days, the number of what they called fallen angels, when we lose a warrior in iraq and afghanistan the military has a freeze for it. i was making my fourth or fifth trip out of baghdad, and i do not know if it was a colonel or a major who said -- they said, "senator, permission to board a fallen angel." then in the back of that cargo plane came a flag-draped coffin. my colleagues with me on that trip, all we could think of was
the family waiting in dover, delaware, for that angel to return. it matters. that is what i never generally say how manythe exact number. 6,502 fallen angels as of today. 50,060 wounded. over 17,000 with multiple wounds, and those of you out there who are of the vietnam generation the president and i are from, 50% of them would have died if they received the me injury in vieam but for the facthat of what they call
theriage capability ofhe military. they are going to need extensive medical care for the rest of their lives, and that does not even count the unseen wounds of posttraumatic stress, traumatic brain injury. understand one thing about the president and me. we only have one sacred obligation. we have a lot of obligations, to the children, to the elderly, to the needy. we have only one sacred obligation, and that is to afford them -- that is to care for them when they come home from war. when those streets are renamed, this obligation will last for
another 30 years, and ladies and gentlemen, bothers me the most is their attitude about not taking responsibility. the american people are so much better, so much stronger, takes much more responsibility than these guys give them credit for. i have never seen two candidates in my lifetime for the highest office who are more negative about the state of our country, about america's prospects for the future, about the willingness of the american people to take responsibility for their own lives. governor romney constantly talks about america in decline. america is not in decline. we are better positioned than any nation in the world to lead the 21st century. america is not in decline. 5.3 million new jobs after losing 800,000 jobs a month, creating 160,700 a month. american is not in decline. america is not in decline.
exports are up 41%, creating 500,000 new manufacturing jobs since 2010. housing starts are at the highest level since 2008. what do they say? america is in decline? america is not in decline. americans know it. for the first time in five years the polling data shows more americans are optimistic than pessimistic about their future. there's much more to be done. but america is not in decline. governor romney and congressman ryan are in denial. that is what it is. look, the entire history of the journey of this country could be summarized in one word -- "forward." always forward.
that is the history of america. i got news for these guys -- gentlemen, it has never been a good bet to bet against the american people -- never, never, never, never. we need you, ohio. together we can win, and if we win ohio, we'll win this election. god bless you all. and may god protect our troops. come on, ohio, go! ♪
watching our coverage of presidential candidates. up next on c-span, a look at the battleground state of iowa. followed by a pennsylvania senate debate. then a debate for u.s. house debate in iowa. later, mitt romney at a campaign rally in ohio. on tomorrow morning's "washington journal," challenging the polling industry. followed by the battleground states spotlight. an overview of the state. and a look at how mitt romney and republicans are campaigning
across the state. later, an analysis of president obama's strategy. "washington journal" live every morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> as we approach election day, c-span is asking high school students to send a message to the president. students will answer the question, what is the most important issue the president should consider in 2013. for a chance to win the grand prize of two out -- $5,000. cb -- c-span's competition is open to students grades 6 through 12. find out more at studentca m.org. >> the u.s. house and senate and
the federal government -- host: we are highlighting key battleground states of campaign 2012. today we put a spotlight on iowa. joining us from des moines is a senior political writer with the associated press, mike glover. what is the economy like in the iowa? guest: the economy is probably better than the rest of the country. it's not great, but we have not suffered the depths of the recession that some other parts of the country have. the economy is less of an issue
than it is in many other places around. basically because the farm economy is pretty good this year. commodity prices are up as well as land prices. so there's not a lot of economic uncertainty. host: what are the top issues that iowa voters are thinking? guest: it depends on what group you are talking to. on the republican side, the topics they are talking about are the social issues. that's very important.
it has driven republican politics in the state increasingly. they care lot about social issues. they care a lot about those kinds of personal issues that drive voters. so that drives the republican electorate. on the democratic side, the things driving them, there's a desire to retain a democratic presence. so it's more pragmatic issues on the democratic side. host: how many electoral votes of the state have and how did it go in 2008? guest: 6. it went democratic four years ago. barack obama carried the state fairly easily. the polls are showing him with a lead of significance in this election. host: give us a sense of the demographics of the state's voters? who are we talking about? give us a sense of some key areas as we look at this map. guest: there are couple of key areas. first, let's look at eastern iowa, davenport and the surrounding area, a couple hundred thousand people, it is a swing county. davenport is industrial, democratic. it will depend on turnout. if you go to the northwest
corner -- corridor of the state, that is a role, very republican area. -- a rural. an area that is more or less evangelical christians, and they're not excited about mitt romney. they are republicans. he does not energized them. we will see what the turnout looks like in northwest iowa. those two areas, if we want the turnout in posted areas, it's very heavy in the quad cities, but good news the democrats. it's very heavy in northwest iowa, but good for republicans. the central part of the states, including des moines, that democratic. we will watch the turnout. democrats have to come out of here with $10,000 plurality of voters in that county, the democratic part of the state. we will see what kind of "margin call, obama has here. host: voting systems in your state, how do you vote? guest: i voted two weeks ago. we have early voting and starts three weeks before the election. you can vote early.
about one-third of the total votes cast will be cast before election day. a lot of the stuff that's happening right now in terms of trying to influence voters is wasted, because a lot of people have already voted. you can vote in your present before the election and then we have -- we vote in precincts across the state in every corner of the state by machine. host: if there were any issues and a recount was necessary, how does that work in iowa? guest: we do have a procedure for a recount. if an election is within 2 percentage points, it's an automatic recount. you can petition for a recount if it if it is a little larger than that. so there's a possibility of a recount. we have never had that and it's
never decided an election, but there are procedures in place to have a recount. we anticipate this election will be close enough for that could be an issue. host: the senate and house races, paint as a picture in your state of house races are shaping up? guest: the house races are interesting. we have two very interesting house races. there's been redistricting. we have had a couple incumbent members of the house. they are running against each other in a new third district in the central part of the state. so you have an incumbent republican and an incumbent democrat running against each other. every poll i've seen shows it's a very competitive race. it will come down to a wider.
it will come down to the wire. in the western part of the state, an incumbent is being challenged by kristen bell sack. it is a republican-leaning district, but she's a pretty strong candidate of, so that will be an interesting race. in the other two, we have to incumbent democrats who look like they are probably going to win another term in congress. so we have to be interesting races anti a bill that look like they're shaping up to be pretty much as expected. host: mike glover, senior political writer at the associated press.
we have a phone line for iowa residents. republicans can join us by calling -- as well as democrats -- and independents -- the des moines register came out with its endorsement on the weekend and got a lot of attention. guest: it endorses mitt romney. i tend to downplay newspaper endorsements. i will voters are traditionally very, very independent and make their own decisions. newspaper endorsements in this state don't have a lot of impact on the outcome of an election. the des moines register is a large newspaper, the largest in the state, but i don't think that endorsement will make a lot of difference in the election. host: why do you think it got so much attention? tell us how it went back in 2008 and how this is a shift? guest: i think it was more of a focus on issues.
i think the newspaper does look at issues, does look at the candidates' stands on issues, and does make a decision based on what they think will be the best for the long-term good of the state. however, voters in the state are very, very independent. they pride themselves on making their own decisions. newspaper endorsements traditionally don't make a lot of difference. i go back to four years ago, the des moines register in the democratic primary endorsed hillary clinton just before the primary and barack obama buried her in the primary. host: it endorse mitt romney during the prime area we are talking about the battleground states of iowa. carol is on the democratic line. caller: i want to ask the gentleman what was his response when the man came out talking about the rape issue and our people in iowa taking that in,
whether they even big about the fact that their daughters could be put in harm's way with somebody making a broad statement like that? guest: well, i think voters in the state take those kinds of issues very seriously. i think that any comment about that will have an effect on the campaign. this is a state where something like 80% of iowa residents are regular turn to attendees. about 80% of the state is injured somewhere or other on sunday mornings.
-- in church. so these types of issues tend to resonate with them. they have different views about them, but they care about them. so those issues have a lot of impact in iowa. i think that iowa voters tend to react on a gut level to those types of issues, but they do react. host: let's hear from mark in des moines on our independent line. caller: i've been watching the election closely and i would like to hear the politicians talk more about the issues instead of bad mouthing each other. i don't think it's very presidential for obama to come across that way on tv. i will just wait for a response. thank you. guest: well, the candidates would say that talking about the negatives of their opponent is talking about issues that affect voters. but it has been a very even campaign.
a very hard-fought campaign and a campaign where neither side is willing to give up an inch. i think what you will find, as we move into this new television-internet era is the candidates will not give an inch and they will not step back from attacking each other. you are going to find the candidates feel that they cannot let their opponent get an edge by beating up on them and they're not responding. so you are finding both candidates in this election, and i think in the past couple elections, feel like they have to weigh in and bury their opponent in negative television ads. i recall being on a campaign to a couple years ago and we went to the site of the lincoln douglas debates, which was held throughout illinois.
there were held in parks throughout the central part of the state mainly. they would all happen on sundays and people would come out at noon after church and lincoln would have an hour to give his position and then an hour for douglas and then lincoln would have an hour for rebuttal and then douglas would have an hour. if so they with and the entire afternoon having a picnic lunch at the park talking about issues. i kind of twist that would happen, but i cannot imagine any television network in america is going to put up with a for your hours of candidates talking about issues. so i think we are reduced because of the way we depend on the media, reduced in the way we talk about issues. we are reduced in the way we can talk about it. part of it, it is a product of the media age in which we live and the way people have figured
out how they canse that media. i don't think it's positive, i don't think it's good, but it is what people have concluded they have to do. host: let's look at an ad that president obama's campaign is running in battleground states including iowa. [video clip] >> which do you believe, what mitt romney tv ads say about women or what mitt romney himself says? >> do i believe the supreme court should overturn roe v. wade? yes. it would be my preference that they reverse roe v. wade. it can and hopefully will be reversed. planned parenthood, we are going to get rid of that. cut off funding to planned parenthood. >> no matter what mitt romney does say, we know what he will do. >> i am barack obama and i approve this message. host: how much our ads like that one resonating in iowa? guest: that's a really big deal in iowa. barack obama, if you look at the
polling data, he has built a pretty significant lead among women voters. these are issues women care a lot about. barack obama is directly addressing them, directly saying, if you want your rights as a woman to plan your own life, your rights as a woman, to table to assert yourself, you better vote for me, because mitt romney will rein in those rights. that issue resonates very strongly around iowa. women voters can make a difference in this election. if you look at polling, the polling among male voters is pretty even. among women voters, barack obama has a pretty strong lead. this election in iowa and in many other states, i think, is going to be a turn out game -- who can get their voters to the polls on election day. barack obama, to say, i have a lead with women voters, so let's make sure we get them out
on election day and let's give them a reason to show up. this is what he thinks is the reason women will show up and vote for employer. host: a story in the quad city times -- iowa is the focus of our conversation right now with my glover, a senior writer for the associated press. let's hear from david on our independent line in texas. caller: hello. i believe obama has no problem. this is the media just keeping the news going.
i am in texas. i am over 60. out of my whole family there are two of us that have landlines. i get maybe 8 or so calls per month on my machine. being in texas, hardly any true christian is going to vote for romney, who is a mormon. he has no chance. host: let's get a response. are you seeing any of those concerns in iowa? guest: i can tell you this. i'm over 60 as well, so i understand that. we are getting phone calls in iowa.
the issue of romney's religion is an issue i raised with him when he ran a pull your years ago and its initial history sensitive about man does not like to talk about. iowa republicans are dominated by evangelical christians. they are a bit leery of mormons. they don't understand it. they don't like to talk about it. no one will say i am not excited about mitt romney because he's a mormon, but they are aware of it. so that is an issue. it goes more to not whether someone will support mitt romney or not support mitt romney but the enthusiasm level they will bring the campaign. that diminishes it just a bit. so that's an issue. if you look at how the campaign plays out, i think that will be one of the majoridin fas this ectionwhich i thk is very cl and that is the enthusiasm level that each candidate can bring to the game. can mitt romney excite the republican base, which is largely evangelical christians in iowa?
can barack obama excite the democratic base? he has a challen to excite voters in certain parts of the state. i think he has an edge because the democratic base is kind of desperate to hold on to a presidency. i feel the republicans are having trouble exciting their base. host: jim is on the line. caller: i'm calling from dubuque, iowa. i'm in the first district and we have seen a huge shift over the last six months with the enthusiasm you described, the gap between republicans and
democrats. there's two things i'm really interested in hearing from you about. with all the polling on social issues at stake in this election, which includes women's choice and t pro-life issue, or religious liberties. what i can tell you what we're seeing in the first district is a huge surge in women, especially catholic women who are changing their minds about voting like they did in 2008. i'm also interested in finding out if you can expand a little bit on the logic behind the des moines register for the first time in 40 years supporting a republican candidate. thank you. guest: thank you. by the way, will be in dubuque taking our grandkids to the water park, so i will enjoy yourovely city. i don't know why?
the des moines register decided the way they did. but this is an election that i think has energized women voters. i don't think it is a blanket issue. i don't think women voters will be energized to vote one way or the other. but i think women voters are energized. women voters on both sides of all issues that affect women understand that there is a pretty stark choice in this election and that they understand. they need understand they need to vote. i feel both candidates have convinced women this is an election they will be affected. the things that affect women will be affected by which candidate wins this election, in other words. there will be real concrete change. so they are energized. typically, i would say, in most elections that would favor democrats, because women tend to vote more democratic than men
do. if we will see how it plays out. host: the front page of the des moines register from a few days ago attracted attention because of the way it portrays president obama and the way it portrayed governor romney, showing president obama in one light and governor romney in another. tell us about the fallout from this. guest: had i been the photo editor of the newspaper, i would not have picked those photographs. i felt those photographs gave a message. if you look at the front page, you got a feeling the newspaper was trying to present a positive image of romney and of a negative image of obama. everybody i've spoken to has given me the same kind of feedback. it was a mistake for the newspaper to do that, a poor choice of gore made that decision. host: how much of the candidates visiting your state,, are the candidates visiting your state?
how much attention is iowa getting on the ground? guest: all the attention we can handle. both candidates are here routinely several times a week, both of them, along with surrogates and along with their. running their there's not a single day that goes by in the state where we don't have a visit from a candidate, running mate, or significance forget. both candidates have made iowa a focal point. there are about nine states that are swing states right now. this is where i think the dynamic of this election lies. mitt romney has to win all nine of them to get to 273. he's behind in seven, including iowa. so they are fighting in this very small set of battleground states, because they will be
the ones to decide the election. right now mitt romney has a talent, because he has to win all those swing states, i think. host: let's listen to governor romney recently talking about jobs. [video clip] >> when we do those five things, this economy will. come will. we will create 12 million new jobs in four years. we will see rising take-home pay. if we will get america oppose the economy growing at 4% per year, more than double this year's rate. after all the false promises of recovery and all the waiting, we will finally see help for america's middle class. host: that was mitt romney in iowa on friday. let's hear from richard in milwaukee, wisconsin on the democratic line. caller: good morning, c-span, and good morning mr. glover. i have a question on the associated press. where do you get your polling from? at work we have 90 people and last week we took our own polling.
that was in a secret ballot. everybody said that they never got calls in the last 30 days, calls from anybody. so we took our own secret ballot. obama comes out with 77 people. so that is my question. thank you. guest: well, thank you. by the way, i will be in milwaukee a couple weeks after the election. it's one of my favorite cities. so i enjoy taking a call from up here. if we do bowling and we have a polling firm contract with that does are pulling. we have a sample of 700 people nationwide, so not everybody gets a phone call. our polling is done in conjunction with other news organizations. but we don't do as much poling as other news organizations do, because our feeling is that if
you spend a lot of money on pulling a, you are not spending a lot of money on other things such as actually covering the news. as a news organization, we think our resources are to be spent on going out talking to people, listening to candidates, talking about what they're saying on the campaign trail, and reflecting that. so we put less emphasis on poland and other news organizations, something i support. host: independence day on twitter writes -- our guest mike glover officially retired from the associated press in may, continues to write extensively for the wire service. he has interviewed almost every major presidential candidate over 30 years. the new york times has a focus on battleground states from this weekend. it says --
how significant is this not just in terms of the number of votes but in terms of symbolism? guest: i don't think you can underestimate that. you have to understand that when barack obama ran for the democratic nomination for president, was running against hillary clinton. at the beginning of the campaign, the assumption was hillary clinton would be the nominee. she's the wife of a former president, she's better known, while barack obama was a freshman senator, a long shot. so the assumption was hillary clinton would be the nominee. when barack obama came to iowa, he worked obama hard. i bumped into him at the check- in desk of the holiday inn. he said, "you're mike glover, we have an interview set up. let's go in the bar and do the interview now," so we did.
a couple of his letter, and invitation to go to the white house holiday reception. and remember looking around the white house >>, thinking, he has come along way. i think barack obama understands subject i will put him on the past two that nomination. he keeps in touch with all here. he understands that i will put him on the past that he is on.
tended to not consistent on the issues. they understand the issues and falls in close. " workmen voters in any other state i have spent in her, and i have been in all 50 karen politics. the fall elections closely and to understand where the candidates are on the issues and i understand it. and intends to nominate him. in iowa, , if you are a candidate and you are anti- abortion fourth pro- -- heror pr choice, erickson is the change their position in the
middle of the campaign, they will punish you hair. -- for it. host: mike glover, thank you so much. host: sue dvorsky is the chairman of the iowa democratic party, joining us this morning to talk about her state as a battleground. sue dvorsky, cbs news says all four major iowa newspapers back mitt romney. what does this mean for you and your efforts? guest: i know that my good friend, mike glover, just talked about this it really doesn't have any impact at all on the field organization on the ground. a lot of this is sound and fury, but it simply does not impact what's happening. as of last night, 157,000 lead
in absentee ballots votes cast. so that is what we're doing. it really does not have an impact on these young people, these thousands of volunteers and staff. host: tell us more about the ground game that you are conducting in iowa. guest: we have always known that this was going to come to be a close election. we have been building this infrastructure for more than two years to withstand the weight of this. we have 67 field offices this is an unprecedented field organization. partnership between the president's campaign and the iowa democratic party. the key is, in each of those 67 field offices, 334 staging locations for the four-day, 'get out the vote' weekend those represent tens of thousands of volunteers who are working out of those offices. the president is using those offices, but so are our four congressional campaigns, our senate races and our state house races. so this is really a wall to
wall, top to bottom effort. it is going to work well in our legislative races, and it is going to work well in the presidential race. host: a recent poll found the president hitting the crucial 50% threshold in iowa, leading romney 50%-46%. i am reading this from "the hill" newspaper what do you make of these poll results? guest: any individual poll at this point there is sort of an obsessive look at each of these. end of the day, the president has held this lead a lead the entire way. we opened the first offices our first eight offices were opened in august of '11. so this lead is i believe it is going to be very difficult to assail the president's lead here. it is a slim lead, but it is a steady lead and it has been the entire way.
we have the privilege , during this last two years, while the republican nominating process was moving forward we have been watching this process very closely since january of '11. during that whole time, we knew who our nominee was, we were behind our nominee, and we have had all of those months have been building months for us. we did not have to wait until june to know who the nominee was. we moved from caucus to convention smoothly. every one of those steps, bringing more and more of the infrastructure into place. that has been our task, and we have executed it to take the weight of the next eight days. host: sue dvorsky is chairman of the iowa democratic party, she joins us from des moines
this morning. if you'd like to join the conversation, we have a special phone line set up for iowa residents. sue dvorsky, talk to us about the state of iowa key areas the democrats have to win on election night to be victorious. break it down for us. guest: we have gone from five to four congressional districts, roughly quadrants, that have split the state into rough quadrants. as we go around the horn, the first congressional district is bruce in that district we have nearly all of our incumbent state senators. i know this is a focus on the presidential campaign, but it is incredibly important to remember that the president is not on that ballot alone.
here in iowa, we have a one seat democratic senate majority that is standing between a very aggressively devisive social agenda from the house republicans. very much mirroring the federal conversation. thos incumbent senators are nearly all in bruce's congressional district. that is very much a situation where everyone is working together. the senate candidates are talking about a balanced approach to problem solving. the same kind of dynamic in the second district.
we have a big swing county. dave loebsack has been there nearly 200 times. that is a remarkably robust field operation. leonard boswell there is one thing i will respectfully disagree. tom lathem moved into that district to not have to run against congressman king. the third district of iowa is such a mirror.
it is the middle of the country, the state, and it is nearly evenly split, registration-wise. leonard has represented better than 12 of those 16 counties. he has got that kind of edge there where people know him. i can guarantee that pope county democrats understand the need for margin there. interesting race in the fourth district. steve king he has made a name for himself as the face of the tea party.
christie vilsack she has been talking for 1.5 year about a local message for those 39 counties, versus national grandstanding. she is against a longtime incumbent, but he is not an incumbent in that district. he has at least 20 counties to introduce himself to. we've got incredibly interesting races underneath the president's race. host: we have a republican caller from georgia.
host:-- caller: and watch the sunday news shows to try to get all of the santa the issues. i want to know about the impact on voters that the white house cover-up of the libya murders and the tax is having. guest: to you and all of our friends and people viewing from the east coast, i hope that all of you are safe. the story that -- very complicated set of circumstances in libya and that part of the world, i believe it does not lend itself to easy politicizing. i am a state party chair and
have absolutely no information other than what you have. what i see, i understand that this is being viewed through different prisons. what i have observed there is an incredibly complicated set of facts on the ground -- changing minute by minute. i do not believe that this has been a cover-up. i do not believe -- i believe that in our rush to fill a news cycle in a highly politicized and highly charged political environment, we simply, as the white house, and as the state department has collected information, they have gotten its to the american public. host: democrat from florida. go ahead? all right, we're going to move
on to barbara. angie, are you with us? you are on the air. caller: when americans wake up on november 7th, they have been made the right choice of president obama. -- corporations running their country, they will regret their choice for ever. everything the president has done -- doing it -- he inherited bankruptcy of the whole country.
-- shipped off the jobs to foreign countries. i lived through that. i have been a refugee almost all of my life. guest: a couple of the important points that you bring up -- one of them is that, i do believe that voters in florida and the voters in iowa, and voters across the country understand the depth of what this president and his team faced when it came in. today is the anniversary of the great crash in 1929. the dow did not come back to its pre-1929 levels until 1954. that is what a depression looks
like. that is what this president, his policies, his team, that is what was prevented. i do believe that americans are looking very carefully at where we were and the direction and pass that we are on. i think that is the critical piece. we are working very hard here in iowa, i know that my counterparts are working very hard with people who believe like you do in florida, to make sure that this path continues to be a path of stable, steady recovery. host: on twitter , gary wants to know how a democrat and care republican can be elected? explain, what length -- will voters when they elect a
democrat and republican, what role are the plane? guest: if i could do that, i would quit this and write a political science book. and i would go down and live in florida. it is the case that for better than 30 years, -- it is not just a republican and democrat. it is a grassley republican and harkin democrat. they represent very well the court believes of their two parties. this is what we call a swing at stake. this is how this state operates. this is a purple state. sometimes we -- is not the case that went barack obama wednesday 6 electoral votes, this will not turn iowa blue.
that would turn his victory -- and retention and expansion of the state senate majority, which will bring house steeps and be part of a strategy that brings state house seats coming back. it has us on a possible pass to win all four congressional seats. it will be another battle to hold those gains. it is a very independent-minded state. we are not split east and west. it really is in the four corners. senator grassley and senator harkin are the face of this state. caller: good morning. i did not vote for president obama in 2008. and did not vote for mccain and
2008, sarah palin scared me. rd -- at every turn, he has gone for democrats, republicans, independents, he fought very hard to get unemployment benefits for people who were out of work. i saw that. she worked very hard to get bp in their and take care of the people in that area. i saw that. i am not hearing the democrats expand on this. i am independent. he has done a very good job of taking care of all of the people. democrats, republicans, on every issue. it is not just the economy. it is improving, i see it here in michigan every day.
i go to a store and see a help wanted to sign on the door, that is very unusual in the last seven or eight years. guest: barbara, i appreciate you outlining that so clearly from the point of view of an independent voter. i do believe that the president has acted in what he believed was and is the best interests of all of the american people. that has not always been popular in my own party. in this very rapid news cycle, we do tend to forget where people have come from. he made the decision on the auto industry rescue, and how it would be structured. he truly believed that that was in the best interest of an entire sector. a august in michigan, an entire
sector of the midwest. he made that decision, and it flew in the face of a lot of resistance. he has talked about education issues that have not always been popularly received by segments of my own party. he has done that because, i truly believe, he is leading the american people from the middle out. that is why i think the other side likes to throw around these political science words of socialism -- it just flies in the face of reality. he has actually been quite moderate and middle of the road, and he has stayed a steady course with his getting principal, problem solving. i think that does appeal to independent voters. it is appealing to venture in iowa. i know it is, because that is what the data is showing us.
last summer, i could sit here and talk about what our plan was. what i have now is data. those 67 field offices -- that is not just a number, an impressive number, those are places full of people working to talk to -- not to get out our base, our base is there. for us, this is about talking to independent voters. that is the biggest third of our republican, democratic, and no-party registration in this state. a balanced approach, with everybody getting a little bit, and everybody getting a fair shot, this is a message that resonates with people. it is an iowa kind of message. the extremism, it really is not a way of life here. iowans are typically independent
voters. they just want their government to work. they do not want to think about the government that much. when it is needed, a think we are looking at this right now. when a crisis happens, this is when governments function is so clearly illustrated. there simply are functions that we must do together as a government. i believe that that message is resonating with independent voters. i think you for sticking it much more eloquently. host: sue dvorsky, this story while back looks at voters in your state. to the pool of an affiliated party voters remains the largest bloc in iowa. back in 2008, democrats had 817% advantage over republicans. this was after the tumescent eight elections. -- 2008 elections.
these numbers were from the i was secretary of state office. have you lost ground in terms of registered voters? guest: we have registered about -- we registered 3500 new voters in august. that may not sound like a lot, but this is a highly registered state. we are on a path when the numbers come out at the beginning -- the end of october, probably the end of this week, we are on a passed, in the three months, virtually erased that advantage that took the republicans three election cycles to do. it is important to remember that the republicans had a highly competitive governor's primary in 2010, which is a huge opportunity to register. we did not, we had a sitting
governor. our effort there was turnup. the next opportunity for republicans was as long caucus season. many campaigns were in here. we had our nominee. we were beginning to build our organization. in the third place was the spring primaries, where there was a record number of legislative primaries against republicans, from their own right, to move the party even further to the right. as i have said, we have started registering young people. that is a big base for us. students and young people that were living in this state in 2008 who have subsequently moved. this is not a symptom of democratic voters moving to the republican party. we are almost back. i think the important number is
turning out who those registered voters are. as i said, we have got a remarkable advantage. we are breaking records from 2008. that was our word highet watermark. -- our high watermark. republicans have not -- they are not closing the gap. host: "the la times" points out that president obama has visited iowa 10 times this year. ed mitt romney was there just on friday. >> when we do those five things, this economy will come roaring back. we will create 12 million new jobs in four years. you'll see rising take-home pay. we will get america also economy
growing at 4% a year, more than double this rate. after all of the false promises of recovery, we are finally going to see hope for america's also middle-class. host: , your response? guest: two years ago, there was a platform of -- a chicken in every pot. we have recent experience with this kind of rhetorical flourish. when governor romney throes of those numbers out there and talks about false promises, there is simply -- and do not think it sells here. i do not think people are believing this. the president has put us on a pass. the president has a record of achievement. not a set of overblown promises that do not have the numbers behind them.
there still is no explanation for independent economist questions about 85 trillion dollars hole -- $5 trillion whole. no explanation still from romney about where those jobs would come from. there is no explanation for this -- that package. there is 4.5 million new jobs created by the policies that this president has instituted. there are better than 30 months of consecutive job growth. there are record numbers of manufacturing jobs coming back. we are at a higher point and we were at the beginning of the bush presidency. you have got record verses which rhetoric,re going to -- and we are going to stand on that record.
york times' w points out that early voting was a huge boon for president obama in 2008. -- this year we have had tremendous gains in early and absentee voting. i think we are well positioned to win on election day. the effort we have put in this year with early and absentee voting is going to make a difference in helping to put us over the top. host: what kind of numbers do you need? "the la times" said that 47% of
registrants were democratic, 32% were from republicans. guest: what we really need is people to be voting. getting the republican base and two votes, and getting the independents who lean republican is the key. we do want them to vote early and absentee as possible, but republicans, historically, do like going to the polls on election day and corn that lever. historically, that is how republicans like to vote. early and absentee is important, we still have a very large number of people that like to go on election day to cast their ballot. guest:-- host: i were residents can call the number on the screen.
what is the republican appeal to unaffiliated voters in your state? we have seen members saying that the unaffiliated party voting block remains the largest. what is your message to them? guest: our message to them is jobs and to the economy. we are really dealing with an economy where the president has been focused on a lot of other things, other than getting america back on track. we have gasoline over $3 a gallon. in rural iowa, that is a tremendous strain on the families and businesses. in some parts of the state, people drive as much as 40-50 miles round trip, earning $8-$10 an hour. these people are being hurt especially hard in the obama economy. our message is focusing on jobs and the economy. getting the country back on track. host: let us go to maryland,
eric, an independent college. caller: i had been watching the campaign. i view it as politics as usual. however, in the second debate, when i heard the president say, governor, the day after the been passing -- benghazi incident, told the american people that it was an act of terror. i thought about that, and i wondered why he allowed his press secretary to say that it was knocked. why did he allow the vice president, during the debate, to say that they did not know? struck me that he should have jumped up immediately and say that he knew it was an act of terror, he should not be saying that.
guest: great question, eric. unfortunately, the white house has not been particularly clear with the american people from the beginning on this issue. i think the american people need a little more clarity from the president. if they do not know something is an act of terror, or if they do know, they need to be clear with the american people. they could have come out immediately and said, we are investigating it. they came out and said, it is not an act of terror. by doing that, i think they really misled the american people. the american people deserve better from the white house. host:, one of our followers encore -- on twitter asks how has the tea party affected voting in elections in iowa? guest: it is affecting voting in iowa to a degree.
the tea party probably was not as strong in iowa as some other states. we have more of an evangelical presence within the party here. there are a lot of tea party activists that are involved and working to put mitt romney and our four congressional candidates over the top. we also have some tea party people running for state house, state senate races. those people are engaged. we probably do not have as large as a tea party presence of some of the other states. host: we heard from the chair of the iowa democratic party a few comments to go. she does not think the 'des endorsement ofr' mitt romney means that much. what is your take on the endorsement?
guest: mitt romney not only got their endorsement, he also got the "quad city times" endorsement and "the cedar rapids gazette" endorsement. when you are talking about a race that will come down to probably 15,000 votes one way or the other to determine who wins the state of iowa, everything counts. receiving the endorsement of those four major newspapers in the state of i what does have an impact. it is something that helps romney. host: let us hear what stephanie cutter had to say about this pit >> of the endorsement romney in the primary. but this is not much of a surprise. it was a little surprising to read the editorial. it did not seem to be based in reality. in the president calls the record or mitt romney's record. it said he would reach across
the aisle -- that is the exact opposite of what he did in massachusetts. running for president of the last six years, he has never once stood up to the far extreme right wing. just this past week we saw it, when he would not take down his ad for richard murdock. he is not willing to stand up when it matters. the fact that he is going to bring people together is just nonsense. newspaper endorsements -- we feel pretty good about where we are. the miami herald, "the new york times", -- i could go on, we feel good. there is movement out there, with people wanting a second term of an obama presidency. host: she is with the obama campaign, appearing yesterday on abc. aj spiker -- what is your
response? guest: it sounds like a lot of spin toomey. they clearly assumed they were testing the "de moines register" endorsement. this is a tremendous shock to the state of iowa that today endorsed mitt romney. i would further say that the amount of spin on this is on real. pick host: chris, a democrat blind. caller: , -- democrat's line. caller: care recently switched to a democrat. i am usually independent. recently, i changed my mind and realize i would rather vote for president obama. the reason is, when my son had to join the military, he is a
very bright person eric. he decided if anyone is going to benefit from his hard work, he would rather it be his nation. there is no prejudice in the military. he is given an equal opportunity for as much effort as he gives. i recently saw, on c-span, a general speaking, there were talking about how ieds are the number-one killer of our troops. calvo listens to his generals -- preside cobolnt listens to his generals, and he is giving them a blank check to fight against ieds. guest: thank you. i want to thank you and your son for his service to the
country. my father is a vietnam veteran. i appreciate the service of all veterans. you can be assured that barack obama and mitt romney both carriker in much about the military and our troops. i want to make clear to you that mitt romney will do everything, and provide everything that is needed to the united states armed forces to make sure they have everything they need when deployed overseas. host: on twitter, they want to respond to one of our callers. they did say it was an act of terror. mitt romney's precise comment in a recent debate was false. obama did describe the events as an act of terror twice.
some officials of the obama administration suggested that the united states had no indication that it was a planned assault. did you have any response to that? guest: i would point out that, several times the obama situation pointed to it being a protest that got out of hand. i do believe that the white house was not straight forward with the american people from the beginning. host: florida, on our independent line. caller: question to the chair person -- and why did the candidates go into the michigan or ohio area and to make a statement about relocating to
china? and never retracted the statement or put out anything from his committee. every time he makes a misstatement, he never comes back and tries to correct it to explain the coup methodology behind that? guest: biden not get that question. -- i did not get that question. host: he had concerns he was raising about the truth telling of that. guest: i think it is clear that the president has not been a firm with china. we have copyrights and trademarks being piloted with china on a regular basis. we need a president that will be firm with china.
we need to make sure it is a level playing field so that american workers can compete. we know that american workers are the most productive, efficient workers in the world. -- that we can make sure jobs are here in united states that should be here. host: is a story that obama hit romney on the china. it also rebuts the claims that he would stand up to the nation. just one day after he went after obama for not cracking down on obama as economic cheating. i are attempting to cast doubt on his credibility on the subject. is mitt romney week on the china?
is a vulnerable spot for him? guest: no, i do not believe he is. i believe the president has been extremely weak on china. the past four years have proven it. she outsourced thousands of american jobs and money that was borrowed against the american taxpayer was also outsourced. when you look at companies like this or automotive. jobs that were supposed to be created in the united states that went overseas. this president has been a complete failure when it comes to co -- host: we have a caller joining us on our independent line. caller: there is a caller -- you
had a different guests talking about the campaign money from louisiana. basically, he was an employee of a company called ties. he said they were laundering money coming from foreign countries going to beat democrats. how come nobody is talking about the fiscal cliff? there was a two our special -- two hour special about the fiscal class. that lady about the military, minister reminded about the cut in defense spending that is going to happen on a january 1st. a very extensive one. very extensive one. that's all i have.
i think it's a thin layer. guest: i'll go to a.j. spiker conspire a response. guest: the fiscal cliff is not only the biggest threat to the united states from an economic standpoint, a social value standpoint but it also is as far as the biggest threat to us from a global perspective. we saw at the democrat national convention where the democrat president led us to over $16 trillion in debt. that happened as the democrat convention was happening and this cliff is real. as interest rates go up and we all know they will, it's going to become a situation where the united states is either unable
to pay its obligations or we are going to be forced to raise taxes on the american people and i don't think anyone thinks we are at a place where the american people have taxes raised so it's a very bad thing we are in right now and we are facing trillion dollar a year spending deficit and it's not sustainable. we're at a place where if you cut almost every program domestically, you wouldn't come close to cutting the trillion dollars you would need to cut for a year so the main thing we need to do is get the american people put back to work so they're productive members of the economy, so they are paying taxes and we can eliminate this trillion dollar a year shortfall but if we don't do that, we're facing a real situation where the country could face economic
armageddon. host: the iowa incumbent -- facing issues like the fiscal cliff. dive into the house races for us. guest: the house races, iowa republicans are in a great position to take all four seats. we have john archer and ben lange in iowa's first and second districts doing very well and polling very well and working very hard. the fiscal cliff and unpopularity of conditioning, one thing we always see is that the popularity of congress, even though it's extremely low, when it comes down to what do you think of your congressman and would you vote for your congressman, those numbers don't reflect the national mood towards the congress but i think the republican candidates are
serious when they say their number one goal is getting the country back on track and putting the american people back to work. host: republican from modesto, california. caller: nancy pelosi said they would still be in charge of the house and we know what happened then so let the democrats spin all the they want. as far as the benghazi thing, obama basically said act of terror in passing. he didn't say that was an act of terror. he did not want the american people to know this was an act of terror under his watch because that's his big thing. this guy has lied and lied and lied and lied and they what about gay marriage, what about doing all this stuff right before the election, all of a sudden i'm going to let the immigrants get a free pass. all this was deputy for
political gain. we are not stupid. host: the caller brought up immigration. can you bring up this story, the president is confident about immigration. these are comments that relate to your neck of the woods. his plans were given in an interview with the des moines register. what are your thoughts about immigration and how it might affect the vote in iowa? >> guest: if the president was serious about immigration reform he would have gotten it done. he had the house, the senate under his first term and was more focused on passing obama care and cramming through a socialist agenda so had he wanted to focus on things like
immigration, jobs and the economy, this president could have done it but he chose, instead, to focus on big government programs that put this nation further in debt and put our future even more at risk. host: a viewer asks on twitter -- what kind of jobs specifically will romney create in iowa? guest: presidents don't create jobs but environment created through a business-friendly culture and government creates the jobs so when you have a government that's hostile, that puts in place regulations that kill jobs, it puts in place a scenario where people don't want to grow businesses but under the romney presidency i think you'll see the marketplace open up more. people will be more eager to invest. biofuels is a fast growing area
of the iowa economy as well as other agricultural sectors. insurance is a big sector in des moines but jobs in general, when you create the environment where people are willing to invest, they will invest and jobs will be created. host: doug from oregon, democrat's line. good morning. caller: my question is somehow they misplaced the eight years george bush was in office and seem to disregard everything that happened during that point like it never happened, it all began under the obama administration. and it just astound me how the -- their whole platform is based on george bush's policies and this 12 million job
creation, again, smoke and mirror. they use this every time they run. george bush ran under he's going to lower taxes, he's going to create jobs. the tea party said they would create jobs and it seems like the same rhetoric over and over and over again. guest: great question, doug. i'm a republican who has been critical of the bush presidency. we funded things like no child left behind, we created prescription drug programs and didn't pay for them and that wasn't helpful and frankly the american people held the republican party accountable for it and threw them out of office so republicans are focused on creating jobs, growing the economy and we're not focused on big spending programs that we know the american people don't want so you have the commitment of republicans that our number
one job and our number one focus will be on jobs and the economy. host: a.j. spiker, chairman of the iowa republican party joining us from ghoinget -- des moines. thanks for being with us. >> on tomorrow morning's "washington journal," we'll talk about how polls are conducted and analyzed and how new technology challenges the polling industry. scott keeter is our guest. [captions performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> we'll look atow -- at how republicans are campaigning. our guest is colorado democratic party chair rick palacio. "washington journal" with your calls, tweets and emails live every morning at 7:00 eastern on
c-span. >> these are the stories your textbooks left out, they're great stories about real people in american history, important moments in american history that we don't know about. first pilgrims in america came 50 years before the mayflower sailed. they had the good sense to land in june but they were wiped out by the spanish. the most famous woman in america, hanna dustin, taken captive by indians in 1695. in the middle of the night she killed her captors, realized she could get a bounty for indian scalps, went back, scalped them, went back to boston and she was a heroine.
in alphabetical order, the candidate are democrat bob casey and republican tom smith. our panelists are monica malpass and action news reporter vernon odom. moderating the debate is jim gardner. >> this is the only broadcast debate in the 2012 pennsylvania senate race between candidates bob casey and tom smith. here are the rules to which the candidates have agreed for today's meeting. the format will include questions to the candidates from me and our two panelists. a coin toss determine the candidate's podium positions and the are of questioning. each candidate will have 90 seconds to respond to each question and 90 seconds for closing statements. the candidates are here to speak about the issues voters are caring about in this important campaign and gentlemen, to prepare for this debate, i asked
an acquaintance what he has gotten out of the campaign and after a moment or two of hesitation, he said, well, there's this senator zero thing and then there's this tea party tom thing going on and i asked him what else have you gotten out of the campaign? and he stared at me and he said i can't really say. so i would ask you two gentlemen if you think that the campaign has reached the voters and if you're proud of the way that this campaign has gone. mr. smith, we'll begin with you. >> first of all, jim, i want to thank the league of women voters and monica and vernon and you for us to be here today.
but what this campaign is about is whether or not you think this country is headed in the right direction and whether or not we need to change course. we have been trying to get that message out here. we have quite a few economic problems here in this country which is why i put out a five-step plan to address that. as i travel across the state, the people i talk to, predominantly it's the economy and jobs and that's what i'm running on, what i put a plan forth to do, to get the economy roaring again so it has jobs, get deficit spending stopped and start paying down the national debt. like i say, i've had that plan this last four or five years, this economy has been stagnated and i have been in the business world for 44 years. that's where i spent my entire life. i'm not a career politician. i'm a businessman that wants to
go to washington and help change things. >> mr. casey. >> i want to thank you and channel 6 and the league of women voters for this opportunity. i think as the campaign gets down to the last couple of weeks as it has people have a chance to evaluate both candidates and because of the intensity of the coverage they're seeing real differences in the campaign. just give you one example i think the people of pennsylvania care deeply about and that's medicare. medicare is a promise to the folks that fought our wars and built this country and there's a vast difference between the two of us on this issue. i not only believe we have to take steps to make sure we have the guaranteed benefit of medicare, i voted to make sure we have those steps and never take away that guaranteed benefit. my opponent, tom smith, is saying we should take away the
guaranteed benefit of medicare and change it either by giving someone a voucher or changing it more radically. the good news is, despite all of the concerns some people have about the way campaigns are conducted, at the end, a lot of folks know the differences on jobs or moving the economy forward and making sure we're doing everything possible to honor our seeshs -- seniors and protect their medicare. >> you can answer or both have another minute to talk about healthcare right now. it's your choice. i can either ask about healthcare again or you can address that issue now again. >> well, the affordable care act that senator casey voted for is one of the biggest power grabs in this country's history. and senator casey is standing in the way of getting it repealed.
i want to see the affordable care act repealed and replaced with a plan that respects our right, pays our doctors and uses the free enterprise principles. what do i have against the affordable care act? do you really want to turn over one-sixth of this economy to bureaucrats like the ones that run the i.r.s. and the post office? the supreme court has ruled that it is a tax, that's why it's upheld. my opponent, senator bob casey, has voted for that. that's 22 new taxes on every class. >> that's not true. >> so, anyhow, the affordable care act is dragging down this
economy. this election's about jobs. we know that, and the affordable care sabbath one of the reasons businesses are so afraid to expand and hire. it is hurting our economy and is needs to be overturned and replaced with the things i said. >> mr. casey, you have 90 seconds. >>ide agree with one part of what tom just said about the number one issue in the campaign is jobs and the question is are we going to continue to move the economy in a right direction or take a right turn back into the ditch we were in for too long. on healthcare, here's what we should do, i think most americans believe this even if they're in disagreement with the legislation or parts of it. we need to get democrats and republicans coming together to make sure this works, number one. number two, i think most people in the country on either side of this issue don't want us to go back to the time when children with pre-existing conditions don't have coverage or treatment, where young people up to the age of 26 can't have
coverage under their parents' plan and we got to do everything we can to make sure we implement it the right way and fix problems. i've voted in support of lots of changes to the legislation. i'll do more of that but worst thing we could do on healthcare is to either put our head in the sand and do nothing which is what repeal means or have a big partisan fight about it. we need to make it work, protect our kids, make sure our seniors are procketd -- protected on medicare and not have a big fight for the next 10 or 15 years which is what repeal would mean and repeal blows an $800 billion hole in the deficit for the next 10 years. that's a mistake. >> mr. casey, you have called yourself an independent senator but in fact you have voted with the president on the big-ticket items -- healthcare, the economic stimulus, the auto bailout. what area do you differ on with
president obama? >> when you represent a state like ours, you have to make a commitment and also have your work reflect the fact that you are an independent voice for the people of the state. i think i've done that. when i voted to make changes to have a stronger healthcare system or voted for measures that would strengthen and protect jobs, i worked very hard to create jobs in philadelphia at the shipyard because we can deepen the channel, get bigger ships and more cargo but in terms of differences, i think the differences that i've had with the president have been fairly substantial on big economic issues. for example, the trade agreements. the president and a lot of powerful interests in washington, democrats and republicans, wanted us to have a trade agreement with south korea, colombia and panama. i voted against these because we
would not do well in terms of job creation in terms of that and we had history with nafta that didn't go about l with our state. the currency manipulation by china. when china cheats on currency, we lose jobs in pennsylvania. those are two and i can list more but i think there's also a contrast here on the stage, i'm against the free trade deals, my opponent's in favor of them and i'm in favor of getting tough on china when they cheat on currency and hurt our jobs and he's in favor of going the same way washington does. >> would you be in favor of increasing tariffs on china specifically? >> certainly if we can implement the legislation that i led the fight on to crack down on china's currency manipulation and actually have consequences, i think that's -- if it's not an exact definition of tariff, it's a reasonable equivalent of that and i think we need to have some measure that puts consequences
on china. they've been cheating and over a decade we lost over 100,000 jobs because of unfair trade as it relates to china. >> mr. smith, 90 seconds. >> i've said before that i believe the american people can compete with any worker in the world. i still believe that as long as we keep the playing field level and i will as a united states senator fighter to do that. senator bob casey was saying about being locked up with president obama, well, senator, your voting record indicates something a little bit different. you vote with the president over 90% of the time, close to 95. but the voters in pennsylvania, they want a leader and how can you sit in the united states senate and your party controls it and you haven't passed a budget in over three years.
>> that's not true. >> that is true. but we will go on. and you have voted to raise the debt ceiling. we need problem solvers. we need to get economy roaring again. and your one term in the united states senate you have voted seven different times to raise the debt ceiling over $7.5 trillion and not once have i heard where you came forward with, ok, here is how we are going to grow this economy, here is how we're going to get deficit spending stopped and here is how we will start paying down the national debt. i have brought forth a plan and at least let's talk about that. to keep raising debt on our children is not the answer. >> you have a question for mr. smith. >> mr. smith, both parties have been accused of kowtowing to wall street and the big banks,
they're big contributors. will you lead the way to break up the big banks and reform wall street or are they too far entrenched and in the pockets of politicians? >> vernon, that's one thing i bring to the campaign. i'm a citizen candidate and unbeholding to no one. i was a democrat and i had to leave them because of some of their policies. i became a republican and i was not the choice of the republican party here in pennsylvania. the voters of pennsylvania could find few people that as beholding to big business as most career politicians are than tom smith. i am my own person, my own man, and i will represent all pennsylvanians. we've got to get the economy roaring and deficit spending under control and i have the plan and the background to do that. that is what i have done for 44
years. i started running businesses when my father passed away when i was 19 and i have been doing it ever since. i have a good sense of what it takes to grow the economy. i have a really good sense of the enormous amount of regulation put on by the federal government, the state government. we need reasonable regulations on businesses, wall street also, but most businesses and people are just getting inundated by regulations passed by washington. >> you would break up the big banks or move to do so? >> i'm sorry? >> would you move to break up the big banks which is has been widely talked about and there's been saber rattling but nothing's happening. >> my opponent, senator bob casey, voted for the t.a.r.p. and it bailed out big banks. that's what career politicians have been doing, bailing out big
banks. they've played fast and loose with the rules and the inevitable happens and what does our government do, it comes in and bails them out. i believe we should not bail out big banks. i believe some banks just get too big. >> because of that follow-up question and answer, mr. casey, you'll have two minutes. >> it's a good question. i want to first provide a little balance to the previous question. mr. smith talked about the debt ceiling. the reason why we had the kind of ideological fight that happened last summer is because you had the tea party forcing the country to go to the edge of the cliff and almost default on our obligation to pay our bills so he can talk all he wants about how we pay our bills but if we're going to allow tea party ideology to govern
washington, we will number worst shape. if we default on our obligation as he has proposed on this issue, it would ruin the economy, it would lead to job loss in the millions and it would be terrible for the future economic prospects of the country. on wall street, i voted in favor of the legislation to finally, finally crack down on the abuses in wall street, the kind of roulette people played with the money that folks invest, powerful interests making deals and scheme artists undermining our economy. we finally have legislation to do that. it protects consumers. it provides more transparency to the actoifts wall street. it is not perfect. we will have to strengthen it. but to say you're just going to allow wall street to run wild, it's not in the best interest of the country. we need to crack down on abuses and hold banks accountable when
they engage in risky and fraudulent practices. >> monica, question for mr. casey. >> 80 people n'diaye in the united states die of gunshot wounds. some would say handguns are too available, others disagree. children's toys are more heavily regulated than handguns. would you like it see stricter regulations on handguns and could we call it a public health and safety issue at this point? >> on this issue we have a consensus in this state. i'm a long-time supporter of the second amendment. i don't think we need new gun laws to change the dynamic on the street. what we should do, though, and i think there's consensus on this, too is, to invest in proven strategies that we know work to be very tough on those who commit violence and crime with guns. part of that is making sure that in terms of what the federal government can do is not to cut as budget that my opponent
supports to, cut the burn justice assistance grants to go to courts and prosecutors and law enforcement, to be very determined to have the federal government play a constructive role in investing in strategies to crack down on crime and send people to prison when they engage in that kind of violent activity so i think we can -- even though there's certainly a big debate about the second amendment across the country, i think we can bring people together and get democrats and republicans to work together on cracking down on crime. >> mr. smith? >> i agree with senator casey on his second amendment stance he takes there. i am also, i think we have sufficient regulations on the books, gun laws. but we need to do more to the cause of these -- why guns are used. there was a study recently done in our nation's capital, in
washington, d.c., and it said most murders with handguns were done by two people arguing who knew each other. so we need to address a lot of things but we need to get more involved with why this is happening and is some of it because we can't get jobs? there's a lot of things involved here. and a lot of people are so -- getting so distraught about not finding jobs. i travel across the state and it's a great state and a lot of people, what i found is people do not want to talk -- what they want to talk about is jobs and the economy. that's what is uppermost in their minds and that is why i am running for the united states senate and why i put forth my plan and i would love to discuss that and i am a second amendment
supporter. >> vernon, a question for mr. smith. >> mr. smith, what about the bill for funding infrastructure improvements in the country. i listened to a british expert describe the united states as a second world country in terms of transit and roads. are you willing to vote to fund to straighten out the infrastructure problems this country has, or no? >> i believe this infrastructure in this country is getting towards its life's end. we need to invest in infrastructure. it's like any other thing you buy or purchase or build, it has a life expectancy. >> you would vote for something? >> no, but what we need to do is to come to the realization that what -- the problem we have. bottom line is infrastructure is declining and it needs redone and so we need to get the
funding to do that and one of the ways to do that is to grow this economy so we have more income for that. there's more than one way to fund transportation. if we was to cut some of our other area such as the energy department, there's lots of places where we can cut expenses in this country and let's do that and we may find a way to shift some of that money over to infrastructure in this country because it is hurting the economy. i felt that firsthand when i was in business, we could not haul some of our product direct. now's the time to get started on this. >> mr. casey? >> vern, i think it's a very good question substantively and shines the light some of the
problems in washington with partisanship and ideology. we've had a couple of occasions in the six years i've served in the senate to move forward positively on infrastructure -- to invest in roads and bridges and public works and ways to improve the economy of pennsylvania and the country and to invest in newer infrastructure meaning broadband and technology to create jobs but the partisanship meant we had a very close vote on the recovery act. cappedidly, we should have done more on that bill when we passed the recovery act. secondly, we have a transportation bill that's a little more than two years, 27 months, but it used to be that democrats and republicans would work to this pass a more robust transportation bill to invest in infrastructure across the country so that we're creating jobs and at the same time
rebuilding the foundation of the economy but again on the transportation bill, one of the reasons that it was held up for so long was because the tea party and the house and their ideology kept it from moving forward. i would hope that my opponent, if he were elected to the you senate, would say to the tea party, we need to move the economy forward and that means disagreeing with the tea party and making sure we are investing in infrastructure. >> mr. casey, you mentioned the fiscal cliff a moment or two ago and for the benefit of our viewers, the fiscal cliff will happen on january 1 if the congress of the united states does nothing before that and the congress has been getting practice at doing nothing -- forgive me -- but if that should happen, taxes will go up for the average american family by about
$3,500. federal spending will go down by $110 billion for the next fiscal year and almost all economists that you read or talk to will say that the united states will go back into recession, unemployment will go over 9%, the fiscal cliff is a dangerous precipice indeed. let's say for a moment that each of you were asked to write a plan that prevents the united states from falling over the fiscal cliff. what would that plan look like? mr. casey? >> jim, despite the partisanship and divisions in washington, i think there is consensus we've got take action between election day and the end of the year to divert the imposition of this sequester. it would be bad for the economy and defense and nondefense. i think we can do that.
i think there's enough awareness of the gravity of the impact, how harmful that would be to our economy so i'm confident we can get that done. i'm not underestimating the difficulty of it but i think we can get it done. number two, what we should do when approaching the short-term crisis meaning between now and the end of the year but more sisktly the long term, we need a bipartisan balance on spending and revenue and have democrats and republicans come together on that. i have been in the senate not quite six years and in that time i've voted for a trillion dollars in cuts to the federal budget. i'll vote for more but i'm not going to support a plan that is reckless in the way we cut spending. there are a lot of places we can achieve efficiencies and provide better results. i was the auditor general of the state for eight years and two as treasurer and saw a lot of waste, fraud and abuse to crack down on but there's more we can do to bring people together to have that balance and invest in
what makes us grow like medical research and infrastructure and cut what doesn't work. i think we can do that in a balanced and bipartisan way. >> forgive me, sir. i appreciate your outlook and vision but i asked you if you had written a plan, what that plan would look like specifically and i don't think i heard that. >> i don't have a plan written specifically but my votes in the united states senate indicate my priorities. i don't think we want 535 members of congress having their own written plan but that doesn't mean we can't have a good exchange. one of the things that i have not just a matter of principle but in terms of backing it up with votes is to protect middle income families. what we should do and unfortunately republicans in the senate won't do this -- we should have a vote to make sure that middle income families have their tax rates kept in place. if we make that a priority, then we can talk about folks at the higher incomes and have a big debate about that but we should
protect middle income tax rates and make sure that whatever proposal we have is balanced so that that we make the right investments today. >> you would support the extension of the payroll tax cuts? >> i led the fight for getting this year's tax cuts in place. that's because of my work and that put $1,000 in the pockets of the average working family but we've got to determine at the end of the year make sure we protect middle income families and their tax rates and figure out a way, a payroll tax cut as to whether or not a measure that was meant to be temporary for the last year, whether or not we can continue that but again, under the principles of protecting middle income families and having a balanced approach to this. >> mr. smith, we'll give you extra time. >> thank you, jim. let's start in reverse. the payroll tax that senator casey has been for and voted for and you would vote again for it,
the payroll reduction tax. i was curious. when you really look at that, what we're doing there with the people that helped, needed help, i agree, and the reason those people needed help is because congress for years now has not had the backbone and the leadership to get the hard decisions made, to get government downsized, get deficit spending stopped and quit borrowing money from china. we have to quit doing that and we've had -- senator, you've been, with all due respect, in the senate for six years and still we do not have an economy that's roaring. we got to do that and we still have this huge, huge deficit spending. but the fiscal cliff, bottom line, has been caused by lask leadership in the former
congresses and we keep just wasting the type and the american people are needing jobs and my opponent here has not come forward with a plan. i come forward with plain on how to grow this economy, a five-step plan and it involves, end deficit spending, get the tax code simplified, where it will eliminate all the special interest loopholes that's in there by most likely put in there by politicians that were trying get re-elected but we values to save medicare and medicaid. that plan's in there. but the big thing is we have to get this economy going and we've got to get government downsize wrd it's off the backs and out of the way of the american people. this fiscal cliff is serious. there is no doubt about it. the bottom line is, we've gotten here because of no action in the past and we need to send people to washington that will make
those decisions, get economy going and we have the plan to do that. >> vernon, a question for mr. smith. >> mr. smith, some of your republican colleagues, counterparts across the country, are talking about federal budget cuts including school lunch programs and cutting food inspectors out to cut the deficit that's been criticized so much. would you vote to cut those kinds of things? >> i want to check every department, every policy that the federal government has. the federal government, we have allowed to grow so big, so suffocating, it touches every one of us. >> but what would you cut, senator? tell me specifically what you would cut right now. >> i want to look at every department. why is the department of commerce so huge but one that i would love -- i want to look at
all of them. because -- i don't think anybody, even senator bob casey, believes there's no waste and duplication in there. it's there. department of energy -- >> school lunch programs and food inspectors are they on the table? >> everything should be looked at but where can we save the most is -- starting in business i always start where the biggest problem is and it's in all departments. >> defense? >> defense, my question in defense is and the sequestration i would never have gone along with, i felt congress just was not doing their job by performing committee but when defense cuts, yes, look at it, but my question is not how much can we cut from defense. i want to continue how much we need to defend this country. but let's talk about another department, department of energy. started in the carter administration in the 1970's to
get us, the main purpose was to get us off of foreign oil. here we are billions upon billions of dollars later and we are no closer than when we started. last year alone the department of energy spent over $90 billion on green energy boondoggles. stop and think. if you have a department designed to get us off of foreign oil and decades later it has not done its job, would you believe that there's been over a trillion dollars spent by the department of energy since it was started, but we got to look at all of those. all of the above. >> mr. casey? >> vernon, just a quick rebuttal on earlier points and i'll answer your question. number one, when tom smith was asked about a cut in the payroll tax for middle income families across the country, he called it
a gimmick. it wasn't a gimmick. it created jobs and moves the economy forward. second, the budget proposal that vice presidential candidate ryan set forth over the course of two different years, in there you see tax implications for the whole country. when "the washington post" analyzed the tax proposals in the ryan budget they said middle class taxes would go up so if you want a middle class tax increase, tom smith is your candidate. on the question of school lunches and food inspections, i voted already for a lot of cuts. when we went through the debate in summer of 2011, we cut over $900 billion over the next 20 years out of the federal budget. did i agree with every one of those? no but we should not cut things like school lunches for kids so they can learn more and earn more later and we shouldn't take a risk with the health of americans by cutting back on
food inspections. i have votes you can point to and people will judge me by that but unfortunately tom smith supports a radical budget that will increase middle class taxes, end medicare, turn it into a voucher program, and be devastating for folks that are vulnerable in a tough economy. >> i want to begin this question with mr. casey and i have to get quote exactly right. indiana senate candidate richard murdoch has said, "life is a gift from god and even if life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that's something god intended to happen." mr. casey, do you agree that life conceived by rape is a gift from good god that should nevere aborted? >> i don't agree with what he said.
it was an outrageous statement. i do think there's a lot of common ground on the issue of abortion, believe it or not. i'm a pro life democrat. i've had that position as a candidate all these years, 16 years as a public official and i know the divisions in the debate but i think there are a lot of ways to bring folks together not just democrats and republicans but folks across the country to emphasize areas where we can agree, reduce the number of abortions and unwanted pregnancies. example number one is to invest in family planning and contraception and fund it. i have a voting record that does that. number two, provide incentives for adoption. i have put forth and it was adopted into law a $1.2 billion adoption tax credit. and thirdly, legislation that i introduced became enacted into law to make sure that if a pregnant woman who was particularly vulnerable, either a victim of violence, woman on a
college campus, situations like that, that she can get extra help if she wants to carry the child term but i do think that these are issues where we need to be very clear and reject statements that are contrary, i think, to what most americans public that horrific circumstance. >> do you agree? >> not at all and i am pro life. with that being said, i would like to clear up a few things senator casey said a time or two, he said it twice that, my plan would eliminate social security. >> sir, forgive me, but let's keep our attention for the moment on this issue. >> i apologize. i thought we had time to rebut. >> i have read that you are against abortion except in that case where the life of a mother is put into jeopardy so i'm trying to figure out where you
disagree with mr. murdoch. >> he should have never said anything like that and i don't agree with it so let's be perfectly clear since there seems to be misunderstanding here, i am pro life, period. but what i find -- and that's it. pro life, period. so wherever you read that, larry, that was inaccurate. >> i'm jim. >> i'm sorry, jim. >> that's all right. >> this is an important issue, there's no doubt and rather than try to divide people with deeply held views on this, we need to come together like senator casey has said, you know, how can we get maybe adoption. my wife and i, we adopted four children and it wasn't easy to do but we managed to do it but we need to work together to reduce thosez@ things -- not adoption, but abortion.
larry, i'm pro life. >> i'm jim. >> that's all right. i have to put my glasses on to see it. >> let's continue with monica for mr. smith. >> mr. smith, the average woman makes 70 cents for every dollar in the workplace that men make in 2012. it's improved over the decades but not markedly. what legislation would you like to see passed to make sure wages are equal going forward? >> monica, i believe wholeheartedly in equal pay for equal work. we need to do anything and everything we can but education would be a good thing. why is this happening? and to confront that head-on. i have been blessed to be surrounded with women of substance. my wife was a professional school teach for 30 years. my daughter runs a business, another one -- i'm sorry, she's
a sports coach. so the disparity, it's not good, that's not a good thing but i will do all i can as a united states senator to encourage and consider legislation that equal work, equal pay. >> mr. casey? >> monica, we had in the last couple of years a couple of occasions to cast votes that directly impact that issue or at least in one case affects women in the workplace. the fair pay act legislation i've supported for a long time, we haven't passed it yet, we need more help from other side of the aisle to do that but we should take steps to remedy that basic injustice which as you noted has been an injustice that has gone unresolved for too long so we need to get folks working to this pass the fair pay act.
secondly, the so-called lily ledbetter act which would provide protections in the workplace for women that are victims of discrimination, that should be more of a consensus. we had to pass it over the objections of republicans in the senate but got it passed and it was signed into law in 2009 so i think there are a lot of ways to begin to remedy basic injustices and at the same time take steps to grow the economy. we've got to make sure we continue to create jobs for the american people, men and women, of course, but i think there are some, i think my opponent's support of the ryan budget and what i would consider radical proposals, instead of moving us forward in the right direction on jobs would take us down a sharp right turn into the ditch but i think we can repair those and correct those basic injustices for women in the workplace. >> i don't want to get bogged down in numbers but when you talk about uranium enrichment,
things can get very anxiety provoking in terms of what iran is or is not doing. you need to enrich uranium between 3% and 5% for the purposes of nuclear power. iran has acknowledged to the u.n. it has some quantity of uranium enriched to the level of 20% and insists that uranium is used for medical research. the standard for weaponized uranium is enriched up to 85% but scientists will tell you you can make an inefficient bomb with uranium enriched to the level of 20%. when i think of inefficient weapon, the image that comes to me is a bunch of uranium in a truck parked at a busy intersection in tel aviv or jerusalem.
what does it mean that iran already has uranium enriched to a level of 20% that could be used for an inefficient bomb and what does that say about the efficiency, if you will, about the sanctions regime that the united states has in place against ryan iran, is that enouh even as we speak? >> that's a very important question. it's a national security question, number one, for us, and also a question about the alliance and unbreakable bond we have with israel that we have to make sure we continue to support and the -- you did a very good job walking through that technical detail and what you're outlining by walking through that is the threat that the nuclear program possess. even absent a nuclear threat
they have shown themselves, the regime has taken action over a long period of time to be exporters of terrorism. every bad guy in the middle east, iran is the backer of those bad guys, number one. with a nuclear weapon they become a greater threat to that region and that would affect our security and economy. we got to take steps. believe it or not in washington sometimes there are moments of clarity. a couple of weeks ago late at night when we voted we had a resolution voted on in the senate. we got 90 votes. 90 to 1 to support a resolution that lindsey graham and joe lieberman, an independent, and i, led the fight on to say containment of the nuclear program is not good enough. we need to make sure they don't reach nuclear weapon capability and that was an important moment. >> how do you make sure they
don't? >> by making sure first that we keep imposing the sanctions and amplify them if we can, work as hard as we can on another track to provide the coalition in the international community to keep the pressure on and never take off the table the ultimate option which would be any kind of military action. >> vice president biden said they don't have a weapon and my thought was they have a truck and if that's all you need then they have a weapon. what is your response to that kind of thing? >> well, you have outlined the problem because even if they don't have every step of technical capability, they have the potential to export that material to terrorists around
the world. we used to be concerned only about the threat posed by the soviet union. now we have to be concernedsmala weapon. as well as organizations around the world. has plopping one of them. >> do you have a red line for iran? >> airline is contained in the resolution. nuclear-weapons capability. we pushed hard on that. when the three of us introduced a bipartisan legislation, i was not sure we get -- at 90 votes. >> mr. smith, you have a least two minutes. >> i do not think i will need that to explain my stance on
iran. but we must make sure they deny get nuclear weapons. where we are act on that, are we really sure certain scientists say this but i will take them at their word that they do not have them yet. and we have to keep using all the tools we can to ensure they do not. that is not acceptable. as far as israel, we must never have daylight between the united states and israel. could the sanctions have been put on sooner? possibly. put them on their as hard as we can. if i still have time, -- there
were a few things he said we back. we will maybe let that go. senator, you keep bringing up my plans would and medicare and social security. no they won't. if you read the plan, you would see that. you but i endorse the rhine plan -- you brought up that i endorsed the ryan plan. indeed they have the courage to bring out various plans. which the people in your party -- which few people in your party have. how we get medicare, social security secured. let's take these plans and have a discussion. we cannot continue to bury our head in the stand. we -- i never said that on the
air. i'm speaking to my plan. please take a look at that plant and then you will see that i did not want to end social security for seniors. seniors, i will do nothing. that will protect it between the government and then. i have some plans in their -- in there. i will and that that you're you were very gracious the time. -- i will end on that. you were very gracious with time. what's the most radical proposal in the congress that got 16 votes was the so-called rand paul budget. the ryan budget has all kinds of
problems three when it comes to medicare, this is the basic debate. my record indicates i've voted in not just preserving it the strength in its -- but strengthening its. >> because of the economic downturn, education has been squeezed from every angle. state budgets have dropped. it makes it challenging to believe our students in the feature would compete on a level playing field with students around the world because a bigger class sizes now, less time with quality teachers. how would you improve quality education? >> the best place to educate our students is at a state level. but in the local school boards, teachers and parents. -- between a local school
boards, teachers, and parents. the board of education does some good things. we do not want to throw that away. we need to -- any federal organization, especially as big as the department of education, there is a lot of waste in there. get that money to the states. they can do it themselves. that is a state issue. it would be more economical doing that. we need to eliminate a lot of mandates by the department of education. i cannot think lot of career politicians -- they do not grasp of these mandates, they have to be paid for. and it falls to the states usually.
let's eliminate that and use our money wisely. focus it like a laser on the local schools and the teachers and school boards. that is how you improve education. >> this is a very important question as it relates to long- term economic growth. because we invested in education, because the big economic edge. some of that has eroded over the last generation. so we have to make smart choices. proposing or supporting to eliminate the department of education the atomic lattice since. in addition to stopping proposals like that from coming into effect, we need to invest in children. early education is critical. of the companies know if
we invest now, that person will grow and develop in the high skilled worker. the federal government, there is some agreement between us on this. it can be a partner and help on elementary and basic education. it should not try to have a one size fits all policy. most of the work are done at the school district level. folks want to keep local control of schools. we should do that but that they can make some changes to what used to be known as notre left behind so for a lot of those changes have been bipartisan. we should continue that. >> if it fisher versus taxes, the supreme court is taking up the issue of whether there should be racial preferences in admissions to colleges and universities that accept federal dollars which means almost all of them. if the supreme court should
decide that race should no longer be a part of a decision making process as to whether an individual gets admittance to a college university, what would be your reaction? is it appropriate that race no longer be part of that or should be a part of the formula? senator casey, you go first. >> if the supreme court were to make that decision, it would be a radical departure. it would be a step in to the wrong direction. we still have a ways to go to make sure that the kind of discrimination which was in place for many generations is rectified. that that in justice is over completely. we can have a debate about to do that but i do not think we should take a radical departure from where we have been. i hope our supreme court would
not make a decision based on an ideology rather than what is best for the country. >> mr. smith. >> we ask that question, i was thinking i believe in what dr. martin luther king said in that great speech of his. we should be judged amount -- not by the color of our skin but by the content of our character. i believe we should try to end discrimination and bigotry wherever we find it. if they overturn that, i do not think the federal government should be discriminated against anybody. basically that is what this does. we need to work to end all that. without legislation. >> thank you so much. that concludes the question and
answer persian -- portion of the debate. senator casey won the coin toss for closing statement orders. he has elected to defer. so mr. smith, your closing statement goes first request i want to thank you and monica -- goes first. >> i want to thank you and monica. my wife and i had been very blessed. after our three biological daughters were well grown, we adopted them. that group together has given sandy and i nine grandchildren thus far. the august is less than a month old. -- the youngest is less than a month old. when he came into the world, he was $51,000 in debt because of
our national debt. while everyone in this generation fights over who among us deserves tom mudge, who deserves credit for building what? how much money we can spend on ourselves right now, who was going to stand up for our children and their children? i grew up in an america where a farm for -- boy who knew how to work could follow his jeans and achieve success. as i watch the basketball teams in youth groups laughing and playing in the jim behind my house, i worry about their america. the america which you and i will soon turn over to them. i will never give up on this
country. i love america because of the god-given freed and that america represents. i asked you to join me in that belief and this caused. thank you so much. >> senator casey. >> thank you. i want to thank the leader of women voters and tom smith as well. in the last six years, i had been an independent voice of the people of our state and i have gotten results. in this campaign to date, seven is giffords have made an editorial determination as to who they would endorse and all seven endorsed my candidacy. one of the reasons those newspapers endorsed me from pittsburgh to philadelphia and a lot of places in between is because of my record and the results i have achieved for the people of this state. leading the fight to cut the payroll tax or millions of americans in -- so bacon have
dollars in their pocket. trade adjustment assistance. i led the fight to pass that legislation. in philadelphia, the deepening of the channels for more cargo and bigger ships, i was the key player in getting the funding for that. getting results is key for our economy. i have the honor to have served the people of pennsylvania to have earned their trust. i asked again to have the opportunity to earn their trust and ask for your vote. thank you para >> thank you, gentlemen. that concludes the debate. the candidates thank for taking place. and those from action news. thank you for watching. now the final words from our co-
sponsors. >> i and the league of women voters of pennsylvania citizen education fund -- we thank the candidates for participating. we are grateful for their kid to the partnership and commitment to inform citizens. voters, you do not need a valid photo id to vote on election day. newly registered voters must show proof of residency. learn more about the candidates at smartvoter.org held make democracy work. but on november 6. thank you for watching. -- vote on november 6. tickets for watching now through election day, watch coverage of election coverage. next, a date for u.s. house seat in iowa.
then mitt romney campaigning in ohio. then vice president joe biden and bill clinton at a rally in youngstown, ohio. as hurricane sandy continues along the east coast, washington d.c. and the presidential campaigns are adjusting their schedules. the federal government is closed. president obama and mitt romney have suspended their campaign activities through tuesday. the president is in washington, d.c. monitoring the situation with fema. representing -- rep steve king and calendar -- and challenger. christie vilsack is the former first lady of iowa.
courtesy of iowa public television, this is an hour. city inoining sioiux waters of the district that republican steve king has been representing in the congress for the past 10 years. getting a bit term with two- thirds of the votes cast two years ago. redistricting may be diluting the republican dominance. that is where christie vilsack may have been hoping when she moved half a across the state to
ames, declaring candidacy for his seat. she is familiar with the district, a traveling the state as the first lady during her husband's eight years as governor. welcome to iowa press. >> both of you are familiar with the format. with this audience and the television viewers -- they will cheer at the beginning and end. the question in this debate edition come from sioux city journal writer bret heyward and kay henderson. >> mrs. vilsack, at an iowa fundraiser, you said, you were running to prove being a woman is not a barrier.
do you ask for them to put asidetheir issues and vote on you because you're a woman? >> i think the delegation will be stronger and i am from one of two states who have neve relected a woman. being a small-time person. and being 62 years old is something i bring to this. this makes me a candidate that provides a different view, and i think that this shows my temperament and temperament is going to be important in this race.
i think that there are times in our nation's history where you need people who are resolute and dig their heels in, but this is not that time. it was addressed by a man who approached me at the greene county fair. i am not a democrat or a republican, i am and american. i want to go to congress as an american and not a partisan. i bring that lens as a woman and there are many issues i want to address that are very important. >> mr. king, when you were speaking with iowa republicans, you said that she is left of san francisco and you said that democrats and to create chaos and order to gain power. can you explain that? >> i said they profit from chaos with fiscal irresponsibility. you look at the groups supporting mrs. vilsack and spending hundreds of thousands -- they are left of san francisco.
one is the anti-meat lobby. this is not a centrist running against a conservative. if you look at the positions -- and with regard to the women issue, i got women voted to office, and i nominated kim reynolds. the last woman to run for congress was marianne miller- meeks. i campaigned for her and vilsack worked against her. >> why did you call attention to your age? >> there comes a time when you don't care what people think, but i need the votes of 700,000 people, but this is an aspect i bring to congress.
i am someone already. i want to get things done. >> the implication is that you are in congress to "be someone"" >> if anyone wants to look at my record, they know i'm moving the iowa agenda. and you don't just go there and put up a vote that best represents iowans. i take that beyond those limits. it would be a relatively easy thing to vote the district and sit in your office and work to get reelected. to take it to another level -- you have to sell iowa values. >> you know, congressman king has said that his agenda moved this country to the left.
i want to represent the 750,000 people in the district and grow the economy. we lost a congressperson. >> let's talk about the economy. >> looking at the economy -- what can you do to accelerate the economy? >> i said i am focused on the local and i start with the local. i see the world as this district -- with teachers. i see my job much as i would on the first day of school. i would look at these counties as 39 entities and would make sure that they all maximize their potential.
i have laid out my plan for layers of economic opportunity. i carry a football with me to create another level of the bio- economy, within 10-15 miles of small towns. >> many wonder about the football? >> it is made of soybeans. and most cars are from detroit and the seats are made of this. with plastic bottles or using this to create asphalt. we can make that within 10-15 miles. >> in 2013-2014, what will stimulate the economy? >> i introduced the first piece of legislation for biodiesel and represent the biggest renewable energy. government has to get out of the way so entrepreneurs can have their way.
what the government needs to do is have a low, stable, predictable tax rate. we have to lower our regulation burden. when i was in business, 43 agencies regulated my trade. there is not a single company that says -- we are proud to comply with federal regulations. eventually, they would be shut down. >> what year would you say the economy will be reocvered with acceptable employment. >> we don't know who will win.
if i knew that, i would be more bold. if we win the majority. we'll hold it in the house, win the senate and mitt romney is president -- by the time he is up for reelection, unemployment will drop 1.5 points. >> what is an acceptable rate? >> 2%, which is a full employment economy. i would try to drive it down -- >> where would you put it nationally? >> we can get it around 4%. >> one of the problems we have is gridlock in congress. congressman king has not done much in his 10 years. we need a farm bill to start with.
that is the most important piece of legislation to people in this room -- >> is that going to effect unemployment? >> i think it will. the farm bill, people feel insecure and are not investing. it is hard for farmers to go to the bank. it is hard for young farmers to know what the rules are. so there is the insecurity. it is not just the farm bill. >> let me interrupt. we will get into a deeper discussion. what is an acceptable rate of unemployment? >> it is 2% on the west and 5% on the other end of the district. if we can get this down -- >> and what year are we talking?
>> you can't know unless you can say that congress will get something done. nothing will happen without a jobs bill. >> let me ask one more thing. how long should unemployed men and women be entitled to unemployment. >> this helps protect people in the downturn, but you have to make sure people don't continue to depend on those. you have to make sure that we have a recovery. >> how long should the unemployment benefits be continued? >> i did not hear an answer from her, my answer is 26 weeks. this has been extended out to 99 weeks, and we need to understand that there is not a lot of return on that investment, there are people who are 63, and this is an early retirement.
and job skills atrophy because -- we have the five people -- we know when unemployment runs out and we're there to hire them. this is not a good return on the investment. the safety net has been 26 weeks. >> i am coming back to you to answer that question. >> i don't think we need to have a definite time on the. we have to take a look at the recovery and make sure that we take care of people who have been unemployed. the answer to this is to take care of the gridlock and actually get something done. nothing has begun -- been done in congress and many told the people there responsible. if we send the same people back
this is not going to happen. we need a farm bill and immigration reform bill, and nothing has happened in congress. this is the most ineffective congress in the history of congress and he is one of the most ineffective congress people in our delegation. >> mrs. vilsack, as a catholic, how has your view on abortion been shaped by religion? >> i am episcapalian. my husband is a cathlic, my children are catholics. we raise our children as catholics. i am happy to talk about my view on abortion. it is that it should be safe, legal, and rare. i've worked hard on the rare
part, because i wanted to make sure this is not just something that divides us politically, and that i would work to make sure we reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and helped unemployed men and women get a job. i work with an organization that does research and now has the beginning evidence to show that we have reduced the number of abortions in iowa by 26% and unintended pregnancies by 8%. i have been in washington talking about the results of this and we hope that this will be a model for the nation. we won't have to talk about abortion if we make sure that people have access to contraceptives. i would like congressman king to explain what his view is on that.
he has said that -- i would like to know if he believes that women in this community have the right to -- the legal right to go into the drugstore with a prescription for birth control pills, and get some of the long acting contraceptives at the local family planning clinic and i don't think he has made his position clear on this. >> it is brazen to make it such a misstatement here. this is manufactured from the other side of the aisle. this follows as far as the president of the united states with what they put out earlier today. there is a case called griswald vs. conn. this was 1965, when the supreme court said that there is a constitutional requirement, that prohibited the states from banning the sale of contraceptives.
i accept that as constitutional, and we tell people to go something they can be constructive with. but this is constructive and a difference between us that is not manufactured. we have babies in america and iowa that are aborted because they are baby girls and the mother wants a baby girl -- a baby boy in said of a girl. this is -- the people of by what did not care about this. i think it matters to a low girls that are being aborted. >> do you believe in the right to privacy which was put forward with griswold vs. connecticut?
>> this is an important question for people to know -- >> i accept the decision of griswald. >> i take that as a no. >> then you misunderstand it. >> do you support an amendment to the u.s. constitution, the person had amendment that was proposed in the state of mississippi and failed? >> i would look at the language of that, but generally speaking, if so inclined to be supportive of the finding -- defining life at the conception and the catholic church in the five basic positions of the church with embryonic stem cell research. i would want to see the language. >> if you years ago you showed a scale model of a wall that should be built on the southern border with mexico.
do you still feel that this is the way to go? >> people said we cannot build a wall. i said, i would get down to the tinker toys and show them. i put together a model and said, this is how we do it. we could build a mile of this per day. this puts aside the argument, that we have 5,500 miles of the great wall of china, but my position is that we do not need 200,000 miles of wall, we just do that until they start going around the end. >> is this a concrete barrier? or a brief explanation? >> when the president ridiculed the wall, he was 600 feet from the fences and the walls and the most down along the border.
i would describe this as a kind of concrete system with the foundational trench, and the concrete panels, and if you build the wall up you have to have routes on either side, with the chain-link fence by the border. we are spending $12 billion -- $6 billion per mile. >> talking about immigration is what we're talking about. president obama -- if you join congress which be supportive of this trend continuing? >> the most important thing is to secure the borders, and do whatever we need to do so that people are not crossing the border illegally, and drugs are not crossing illegally.
i think we need to make sure that jobs are going to americans and we need immigration reform. we need to make sure that there is a pathway to citizenship for the 13 million people who are here, in the shatters -- shadows. and the people who are here -- they have a chance to live the american dream because many of them have offered their lives for their country. congressman king talked about the terms of electricity and use the language of this reprehensible and embarrassing to the people of iowa, that says we can use cattle prods on animals so why not of electricity on people. >> that is a false statement and i will not respond to it. >> there are several communities within your district, that have a large influx of non-in list --
english speaking people, there are several communities like that. do you think these people need federal assistance in the way that the military assists with the military base, and the influx of children into the school districts. do you think that communities should get special assistance when they are in that sort of mind? >> i graduated high school in denison, and those are the community's most likely to ask for that. i do know that we have glasses that are going on right now, -- classes going on right now and i don't know that there is a shortfall of that kind of service.
at the state level -- we created iowa centers that helped with these issues to fill the buffer. this is an interesting idea. i don't know exactly how you'd move it forward, but it is interesting to contemplate. >> mr. king, are you planning to sue -- you said you wanted to sue president obama over the change in policy that young people would not be deported. >> he violated the constitution like gov. vilsack, he cannot do that with memorandum, and this was bogging people down. >> where do you stand on that? >> in the process? there are plaintiffs who won't come on until after the election. i will hold the suit up until after the election and we will get the suit filed.
>> the answer is -- we wouldn't have this issue if congress had done their job. one branch doesn't work well and another steps in. i think the president took a necessary step. >> we will see a couple of commercials right now, the first from mrs. vilsack's campiagn. >> i am christie vilsack and i approve this message. ♪ >> mr. king, mrs. vilsack has called you an embarassment to iowa.
do some of the quotes embarrass you? >> i've said by the time i eliminated the questions and dishonesty, the only thing left was "i'm christie vilsack and i approve this message." the one that is true, was about the vote on hurricane katrina. there will be all kinds of wasted funds. it is a principled vote and it will be easy to vote on. king was right -- this is the sioux city's response. the balance of that is false. i have had better votes since then. voting against obamacare, voting against cap and trade, dodd- frank, those were better votes, but the rest of those allegations are false.
>> he is one of 11 congressmen who took a vote against hurricane katrina relief. i think that everything i said in that ad is true. we have researched all of it. these are congressman king's own words. >> and he is using one to define mrs. vilsack. see what it says. >> what does it mean if mrs. vilsack calls for tax increases? she is for increasing taxes on job creators and in this stagnant economy, christie vilsack will effect --
>> mr. king, you've seen the ad. >> that's the first time i've seen that, but am happy to respond. mrs. vilsack wants the tax increase to kick in on millionares, and many of them are job creators and small businesspeople. >> mrs. vilsack, you've asked for it to be pulled. >> i never said i wanted to raise taxes except on millionares. it is not about small businesses. one reason they run that ad is because i talk about how i want to rebuild the middle class.
i want to make sure we have economic opportunities and -- with millionares raising more. the proposal dave vilsack -- he talked about suspending the tax issues for small businesses -- would be something that is a good idea. >> another ad people are seeing, a photo of you and of nancy pelosi. how do you respond when folks like congressman king accuse you of being a nancy pelosi clone. >> one of the things about this district -- i represented it for eight years. i see every small town in this district as my hometown, the town i grew up in.
all the people in this district -- friends and neighbors -- that is why am. i am iowa. >> you accused her of being to the left of saying francisco -- in response to her saying she represents iowa? >> i did not hear the answer to the question -- that was about nancy pelosi. this is what i know. i know that if christie vilsack is elected to the united states congress, the first vote she would put up would be the vote for nancy pelosi. you have to stand up and you have to shout the name of the personnel you vote for for speaker of the house. that is the question -- i did not hear the answer. >> first of all, we have no idea whether nancy pelosi be a candidate for speaker of the house. there may be other people. i would never presume before i had a job to answer a question like that.
i would take into consideration the other people who might be interested in the job. i'll make the decision at that time. there is no assurance that would vote for nancy pelosi or anybody else until i get the job. >> one thing about ads are both running -- we to accuse the other of not being a person who embodies iowa values. i would like each of you to in one sentence to describe to me what iowa values are. >> iowa values are faith and family and freedom and smart hard work and free enterprise. all the wealth comes from the land. we value that as closely as we can, as many times this weekend. it is a work ethic and faith ethic. that is why i have gone into -- i live here and my roots are here. i did not move here to run this race. i will live here after november, whatever happens. >> i did a tour called the value of work and asked people around the district about bodies we had
in common. i knew this would be a race that was divisive. they said the value of work is important. the value of service to the country, the value of stewardship of the land, family, and education, actually. people who i talked to said education is central to who we are in iowa. those of some of the basic values. i think i heard congressman king say the same thing. i do not think we are that far apart on what we would agree on in terms of what our basic values are. >> he accuse you of being a carpetbagger. what is your response to that? >> all of these towns, i represent everything in this district for eight years.
all of the towns and people in them feel -- >> as iowa's first lady? >> yes. i travelled the country, traveling and representing people in the whole state, certainly in this district. i represented everybody in the district. congressman king represented 40%. i represent the values of this district. >> mrs. vilsack, do you feel comfortable about some of the things portrayed in the ad -- would you like to have them along your side campaigning for you? >> i am not sure what you are talking about. >> the humane society, their views on pork production, would you like to have been campaigning alongside you? >> i have not taken money from the humane society, if you are suggesting that. congressman king suggested that. i cannot and do not take money from anybody who does business -- the humane society, every single town in iowa has a humane
society and people are pointing there and helping to take care of animals. i think it depends on what you are talking about. >> congressman king -- some of these ads, the first we saw was done by one of your campaign. are you concerned about how issues are being framed by ads by outside groups, particularly, how would you like the issues to be framed? >> i knew this would happen. that is why i said a year-and-a- half ago when the announcement came out that this would be a holy war. i said, i will learn things about myself i do not yet know. they will spend millions of
dollars attacking my reputation -- that turned out to be true. i knew this would be the first super pac collection iowa has experienced in a congressional race. one of the reasons i did this many debates is because this is the way to penetrate through that. i did not think we could offset all that spending. if you send back a $1,000 check, you do not get to wash your hands and say, they are nice people who are part of that community who made this ad. local people who take care of these lost animals are not affiliated with hsus. are people i've done it too. there is a big difference. this is a stark gap. the u.s. humane society has a legislative agenda that spends 1% helping pac's, driving a legislative agenda that is anti-meat, that does not sell well in this district. >> nobody likes a pork chop better than i do -- i want to say that. over these expenditures, we have
no control. one of the things i was most proud to do and accomplish was to change campaign finance law. something like the disclose act, which -- the system is broken. it is broken like a broken arm. it is not terminal, but we need to fix it and i would like to be part of that. there is way too much money in politics. when i see these ads on tv i am seeing them for the first time. these are not organizations that i am connected with. in terms of the advertising. >> mr. king, i have a question about taxes. let's say in 2013 you are appointed tax czar to establish u.s. tax policy. what would you do? >> i have opposed the czars, but it would be a tempting appointment -- the first thing i would do is make the bush tax
brackets permanent so there is long-term predictability. then i would go to work to sell to the public the idea that, as ronald reagan said, the federal government has the first lien on productivity and punishes production -- we remove all taxes off of production and put them on consumption. we can transform this policy. that is a piece i have gone around and talked about. i've talked about it each year i have been in congress. i asked mrs. vilsack to debate that with me, but i did not get an invitation. >> i would also like you to respond to that and outline what tax policy would implement.
>> it would not be the fair tax. i do not think there is anything fair for the middle-class about a fair tax. basically, when i went to the grocery store this morning i bought milk for $3.55. if i had to pay 23% of every gallon of milk, 22% sales tax every time i bought a car seat to take my baby home from the hospital or bought a new car, that is considerable. that is fine if you make more than $200,000 a year. but if you do not, that is an incredible tax on the middle class. that is a really bad idea. >> it would only be $2.75 under my plan. you have talked years about the fair tax -- why has it not become active? >> in all my years of talking to round table advisers, all the times i have tested this out, i
would give the argument over and over again, they would come back and say, if it was a good idea we would have it by now. we are the most successful country in the history of the world, but we still do not have a logical thing -- there are political barriers in the way. the middle-class is not disadvantaged by this. we untax the poor. i have turned this around like a rubik's cuba, and every time it looks better and better. but we see people in power -- half of k street is funded by people advocating for tax exemptions. >> could it be enacted in 2013, 2014? >> we need to elect a president who has a mandate for that kind of change. if we find ourselves in an
economic conditions so desperate we are looking for a change -- we have that circumstance, just the wrong president. >> mitt romney does not think is a good idea, either. >> let's shift to horses and bayonets. when you are elected to congress, you will control -- what sort of spending priorities will you have on defense? would you have a spending priority for people or for weapons systems at the pentagon? >> let me start by saying a little bit -- in the future, we are not going to be judged on our might as a country. it will not be disorder as we have or how many tanks we have, how many aircraft we have. we will be judged on our ability to compete in the world economically. i spent some time with people who had survived presidents and secretaries of state on the council of foreign relations, someone i have high regard for.
this is not my original idea. it is basically his. but i agree with him. i think we really need to focus strategically. >> what is strategic -- does that mean you would downsize the current military might of the united states? >> i think we need to be nimble. >> what does that mean? >> because we have to pay attention to terrorist outbreaks that come up often, we need to be nimble. we need to rely on technology. we need to be strategic in how we go about -- >> a smaller military then we have now? >> it might be a different military. it might be smaller, but the most important thing for us is to make sure we have a strong economy in the world. that means making sure that we actually get something done and congress can get the economy back on track. i think we need to be able to react very quickly situations around the world, because many of them are much smaller.
what we have done in the past, and congressman king is responsible for this, we have been involved in two wars that have taken a huge toll in human life and money as well. our debt is $6 trillion when he went in -- it is $16 trillion now. we put to wars on the credit card. we have to make sure that before we go into conflict, we are prepared to do that. >> let's ask about what you just said -- you can reply to that. then, if you explain your measurement of u.s. power in the world. >> i have been accused of starting two wars. [laughter] >> not paying for them. >> i did not restart those wars. that has been repeated a number of times through the campaign. those things were started first of all in september 11 -- we were attacked. our financial center was crushed.
we went into a downward tailspin economically. we went into afghanistan -- you do not check the balance sheet then send troops into battle. make sure they have the training and equipment they need and resources to win. i certainly have supported that. when nancy pelosi came in as speaker, the national debt was $8.67 trillion. when she teamed up with barack obama -- now is over $16 trillion. it looks like i have more power than nancy pelosi and barack obama combined to listen to my opponent. here is what think about military. i believe there is that in the -- fat in the military and the pentagon. i believe there is too much brass there. it will take people on the inside to reform it before we can get that right. we have partly to many civilian employees. we are not keeping the track of that. there are people better in the system to make as recommendations than me. some people i work with, i trust them substantially. john bolton is one. john bolton is one.